UC-NRLF 


B   H   S7E   fi^fi 


S::^ 


^■m^^ii^m^-Mm^ 


•:0'.  »^'r^  'r*^-^^! 'i'H/n;-  B'£tt-;ij  • 


Tlbc  Tllnfversiti?  of  Cblcaoo 

FOUNDED  BY  JOHN  D.   «OC«EF^LLEn 


An  Experimental  and  Introspective 

Study  of  the   Human  Learning 

Process  in  the  Maze 


A  DISSERTATION 

SUBMITTED    TO    THE    FACUr.TN' 

OF    THE 

GRADUATE  SCHOOL  OF  ARTS  AND  LITERATURE 

in  candidacy  for  the  degree  of 
doctor  of  philosophy 

(department  of  psychology) 


I!V 


FLEMING  ALLEN  CLAY  PERRIN 


(Published  as  N      .     .-  n,^    I 


TLbc  XHniversttp  of  CbicaQO 

POUNDED  mr   JOHN  D.  NOCKEPELLER 


An  Experimental  and  Introspective 

Study  of  the   Human  Learning 

Process  in  the  Maze 


A  DISSERTATION 

SUBMITTED    TO    THE    FACULTY 
OF  THE 

graduate  school  of  arts  and  literature 

in  candidacy  for  the  degree  of 

doctor  of  philosophy 

(department  of  psychology) 


BY 

FLEMING  ALLEN  CLAY  PERRIN 


(Published  as  No.  70  of  the  Psychological  Review  Monographs) 


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

My  sincere  thanks  are  due  to  Professor  James  Rowland  Angell 
and  to  Dr.  Harvey  A.  Carr  for  their  advice  and  suggestions 
during  the  course  of  the  experimentation,  and  to  the  twelve  sub- 
jects who  gave  both  time  and  patience  to  the  learning  of  the 
mazes. 


flin^i  RS 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

I.  Introduction    i 

II.  Experimental  Section   2 

A.  Experiment  I  3 

B.  Some  Experiments  with  Modified  Conditions. ...  31 

C.  Experiment  II   41 

D.  Experiment  III   60 

E.  Experiment  IV    75 

F.  The  Learning  Curves   82 

III.  Summary  of  Results  and  Conclusions 94 


I.     INTRODUCTION 

The  incentive  to  the  experimentation  reported  in  this  paper 
was  an  interest  in  the  problem  of  correlating  human  and  animal 
learning  behavior.  The  most  obvious  and  direct  method  of  ap- 
proaching such  a  correlation  is  by  way  of  an  objective  test  that 
will  elicit  similar  reactions  from  the  animal  and  the  human  being. 
The  maze  was  suggested  to  me  as  the  most  convenient  laboratory 
device  for  that  purpose.  Whatever  may  be  the  merits  of  the 
maze  test,  it  at  least  affords  a  basis  for  a  comparison  of  the 
activities  of  an  inclusive  range  of  animal  types. 

The  dearth  of  published  accounts  dealing  with  the  normal 
human  adult  reactions  in  the  maze  led  me  to  believe  that  the 
investigations  should  be  initiated  in  that  practically  untried  field. 
Such  a  series  of  tests  promised,  in  the  first  place,  a  set  of  learning 
curves  that  would  invite  speculative  comparison  with  the  animal 
maze  curves  obtained  by  Watson,  Carr,  and  others.  In  the  sec- 
ond place,  the  project  suggested  the  possibility  of  interesting 
introspective  results.  The  question  of  whether  or  no  the  sub- 
jective phases  could  be  utilized  for  immediate  purposes  of  cor- 
relation was  thought  to  be  entirely  beside  the  point.  I  assumed 
that  the  objective  results  of  a  learning  process  which  involved 
conscious  functions  could  be  explained  adequately  only  in  terms 
of  those  functions.  Accordingly,  the  introspective  reports  have 
received  the  larger  share  of  the  emphasis,  in  conducting  the 
experiments  as  well  as  in  formulating  the  results. 

The  present  investigation  purports  to  be  nothing  more  than  a 
preliminary  study  of  the  general  problem.  It  was  begun  in  the 
hope  that  it  would  include  an  attempt  at  the  correlation  men- 
tioned; it  was  finished  after  having  submitted  to  laboratory  test 
only  the  more  obvious  questions  suggested  by  the  title. 

I  have  omitted  the  customary  bibliography  from  this  paper. 
The  list  of  references  bearing  directly  upon  the  subject  is  ex- 
ceedingly meagre,  and  an  attempt  to  give  a  complete  bibliography 
of  the  learning  process  would  scarcely  be  warranted  in  an  account 


2     ,  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

of  a  very  limited  investigation  of  one  phase  of  the  topic.  An 
excellent  list  is  given  by  ElHson  [Ped.  Sem.,  1909],  and  a  more 
extensive  one  is  furnished  by  the  Clark  University,  "Bibliogra- 
phies of  Experimental  Pedagogy". 

II.     EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION 

The  experiments  which  furnished  the  material  for  this  dis- 
cussion were  begun  in  the  fall  of  1909  and  were  continued 
through  three  academic  years.  All  of  the  work  was  done  in  the 
psychological  laboratory  at  the  University  of  Chicago,  with  the 
exception  of  Experiment  II.  The  mazes  employed  in  the  labora- 
tory were  designed  by  the  experimenter,  and  were  constructed 
by  the  technician  of  the  department.  Two  types  of  maze  were 
used — the  pencil  maze,  and  one  through  which  the  sub- 
ject walked.  A  number  of  different  pencil  mazes  were  employed, 
which  are  described  in  the  respective  accounts  of  the  diffefrent 
experiments. 

The  subjects  were  all  adults,  either  graduate  students  or 
members  of  the  faculty  in  the  departments  of  psychology  and 
philosophy.  Throughout  all  the  experiments  they  were  blind- 
folded while  learning  the  different  mazes.  The  learning  was 
by  trials,  and  after  each  trial  were  recorded,  ( i ) ,  time,  taken 
by  the  stop-watch,  (2),  errors,  (3),  description  of  behavior, 
(4),  detailed  introspection.  The  subject  was  each  time  asked 
to  give  as  complete  an  introspection  as  possible,  and  was  then 
quizzed  by  the  experimenter. 

The  following  served  as  subjects :  Professor  J.  R.  Angell, 
Dr.  J.  W.  Hayes,  Dr.  Mary  H.  S.  Hayes,  Dr.  Grace  M.  Fer- 
nald,  Dr.  Mabel  R.  Fernald,  Dr.  Ethel  M.  Chamberlain  Porter, 
Miss  Sarah  M.  Ritter,  Dr.  H.  F.  Adams,  Dr.  W.  S.  Hunter, 
Mr.  R.  B.  Owen,  Mr.  E.  W.  Burgess,  Miss  Carrie  Nicholson. 

The  investigations  comprised  a  series  of  four  principal  experi- 
ments, which  are  described  below  under  the  headings  of  Experi- 
ments I,  II,  III,  IV.  In  connection  with  the  first  a  series  of 
supplementary  tests  was  conducted  which  are  referred  to  as 
Tests  I,  2,  3,  etc.,  and  which  are  described  at  the  close  of  our 
account  of  Experiment  I. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  3 

A.     EXPERIMENT  I 

The  maze  used  in  this  experiment  is  referred  to  as  the  "Nor- 
mal" maze,  for  two  reasons :  ( i ) ,  it  is  as  exact  a  duplicate  of  the 
modified  Hampton  Court  maze  used  by  Watson  and  Carr  with 
the  white  rat  as  practical  convenience  permitted;  (2),  it  was  the 
pencil  maze  employed  in  our  endeavor  to  ascertain  the  general 
course  of  the  learning  process.  All  of  the  other  mazes  used, 
with  the  exception  of  the  one  described  in  Experiment  II,  were 
designed  with  reference  to  a  study  of  special  aspects  of  the 
learning  process. 

I.  Apparatus  and  Method 

(a)  Description  of  mane:  The  maze  consisted  of  a  sequence 
of  paths  and  cul-de-sacs  in  the  form  of  grooves  cut  through  a 
board  5/16  inch  thick.  The  grooves  were  1/2  inch  in  width, 
and  the  board  was  16  by  24  inches  in  size.  A  diagram  of  the 
maze  pattern,  in  correct  proportions,  is  given  [Fig.  i.]  on  the 
opposite  page,  together  with  the  numbers  and  letters  used  in 
our  description  to  designate  the  various  paths. 

The  maze  rested  upon  a  base  of  plate  glass,  and  between  the 
two  a  sheet  of  paper  was  placed,  so  that  as  the  subject  traced 
through  the  path  with  a  pencil,  a  permanent  graph  was  pre- 
served on  the  paper  of  all  his  movements  in  the  maze.  The 
glass  in  turn  rested  upon  a  heavy  table,  upon  which  the  whole 
apparatus  was  securely  clamped,  in  a  fixed  position,  marked  out 
on  the  table.  The  subject  sat  in  a  straight-backed,  comfortable 
chair  during  the  trials,  at  a  distance  from  the  maze  best  suited 
to  his  ease  and  convenience.  The  starting  box  of  the  maze  was 
directly  in  front  of  him,  at  a  position  approximately  even  with 
the  mid-line  of  his  body;  the  side  BC  of  the  maze  was  to  his 
right.  The  position  of  the  chair  with  reference  to  the  maze 
and  table  remained  constant  throughout  the  experiment,  and  the 
position  of  the  whole  apparatus  in  the  experimental  room  re- 
mained the  same. 

{h)  Method:  Each  subject  made  one  trial  a  day.  at  a  fixed 
time,  for  six  days  in  the  week.    During  the  progress  of  the  ex- 


O                                                          CO 

Tl^r-r- 

■ 

^      ^ 

<n 

1 1= ' 

-J     I              , S 

l-l                                                                          ^ 

< 

^ 

1 

0"* 

U     ' 

id 

►U 

t 

l/> 

l—                  ^         1 

- 

.       1 

r-,1- 

p. 
to 

JfL^^ 

w 

o 


ti^ 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  5 

perimentation,  various  exigencies  made  a  rigid  adherence  to 
the  time  schedule  impossible.  When  these  deviations  from  the 
routine  prooedure  were  responsible  for  discernible  modifications 
in  the  learning  process,  the  fact  is  noted  in  the  discussion.  With 
the  exception  of  one  subject  only,  not  more  than  one  trial  per 
day  was  permitted  each  subject. 

For  each  trial,  the  subject  came  into  the  experimenter's  room, 
where  a  screen  prevented  him  from  seeing  the  apparatus.  He 
was  seated,  and  blindfolded  with  a  pad  of  black  China  silk 
stuffed  with  cotton,  that  effectually  excluded  all  light.  He  was 
then  led  around  the  screen,  seated  at  the  table  in  front  of  the 
maze,  and  given  a  pencil,  the  point  of  which  was  placed  in  the 
starting  box  by  the  experimenter. 

The  instructions  and  directions  given  each  subject  at  the 
beginning  of  the  first  trial,  to  be  observed  for  each  trial,  were 
as  follows :  ( i )  Hold  the  pencil  in  a  position  as  nearly  vertical 
as  comfort  will  permit,  and  at  the  spoken  signal,  "start",  en- 
deavor to  find  the  exit  by  tracing,  keeping  the  pencil-point  in 
contact  with  the  floor  of  the  maze  (i.e.,  the  paper)  until  the  trial 
is  completed.  (2)  Hold  the  pencil  in  any  natural  way  desirable, 
but  do  not  let  the  hand  or  arm  come  in  contact  with  the  maze. 
(3)  Absolute  freedom  is  allowed  as  regards  retracing,  stopping 
in  the  maze  in  order  to  think,  or  to  relieve  fatigue.  (4)  Time 
is  to  be  counted  from  the  starting  signal  until  the  exit  is  reached. 
"Time  out"  will  not  l^e  granted  except  for  unforeseen  exigencies. 
All  errors  are  to  be  recorded.  An  error  is  defined  as  a  false 
turn:  e.g.,  turning  into  a  cul-de-sac  from  the  true  path,  making 
any  turns  inside  the  cul-de-sac  except  those  involved  in  retracing 
towards  the  true  path,  making  turns  on  the  true  path  in  a  direc- 
tion away  from  the  exit.  (The  subject  of  course  learned  to 
discriminate  the  true  path  from  the  false  only  as  he  made 
progress  in  the  learning.)  (5)  Employ  any  learning  technique 
available  or  desirable :  that  is,  freedom  is  permitted  each  sub- 
ject as  regards  thought  processes  or  distribution  of  attention. 
Speaking  aloud  during  the  trial  is  permitted,  but  the  experi- 
menter will  make  no  comment  during  the  trial.  In  general,  each 
subject  is  to  employ  any  technique  consistent  with  the  directions 


6  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

given.  (6)  Subjects  are  not  to  think  of  the  maze,  or  of  learn- 
ing methods,  or  to  communicate  with  each  other  on  the  subject 
between  trials.  (7)  The  maze  will  be  considered  learned  when 
the  subject  is  able  to  trace  the  shortest  route,  provided  there  is 
more  than  one,  without  error,  for  five  trials  in  succession. 

2.  Results  obtained  from  Experiment  I — analysis  of^ 

THE  learning  PROCESS 

(a)  General  account  of  the  objective  behavior  of  the  subjects 
in  the  ma^e,  cctttd  of  the  nature  of  the  learning  process:  It  was 
obvious  from  the  introspective  reports  of  the  first  trial  that  the 
learning  process  was  to  be  largely  a  conscious  one.  Each  subject, 
without  raising  the  question  of  the  possibility  of  any  other 
method,  set  about  to  develop  an  ideational  control  over  the 
maze.  Motor  habits  played  an  increasingly  important  role  dur- 
ing the  succeeding  trials;  and  various  subjects  reported  during 
the  course  of  the  experiment,  that  the  pattern  of  certain  seg- 
ments, which  they  had  learned  to  run  without  error,  had  never 
been  completely  apprehended.  But  with  these  exceptions,  the 
ability  to  run  the  maze,  with  a  decreasing  number  of  errors, 
developed  with  the  ability  to  image  the  path,  and  to  describe  it 
verbally  or  graphically. 

As  the  blindfolded  subject  was  engaged  in  the  active  task  of 
exploring  the  maze  with  the  pencil,  he  was  the  recipient  of  a 
definite  sequence  of  kinaesthetic  sensations,  due  to  arm  movement 
and  strain,  and  cutaneous  sensations,  as  the  pencil  tip  was  pushed 
along  the  side  of  the  pathway,  or  was  moved  without  contact 
with  the  sides,  or  was  suddenly  brought  into  contact  with  the 
end  of  a  passage  and  stopped.  This  immediate  sensory  expe- 
rience, however,  was  reacted  upon  in  a  perceptual  way.  The 
subject's  attention  was,  not  on  kinaesthetic  and  cutaneous  sensa- 
tions as  such,  but  upon  pathways  running  in  various  directions, 
and  the  turns  and  branches  of  the  pathways. 

The  subject's  reaction  was  not  merely  a  perceptual  one.  The 
experience  of  paths  and  turns  was  immediately  translated  into 
image  forms,  of  a  nature  and  to  an  extent  varying  with  the 
individual.    Verbal  processes  were  elicited,  by  way  of  description 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  7 

and  comment.  The  subject  set  himself  more  or  less  actively  to  the 
task  of  discriminating  true  paths  from  the  false,  of  retaining, 
out  of  the  confusion  of  experiences,  the  memory  of  the  true 
path;  of  organizing  his  knowledge  gained  from  each  trial  in  such 
a  way  that  it  could  be  adequately  applied  to  the  succeeding  trial, 
for  the  purpose  of  effective  control  over  the  task  he  had 
undertaken. 

{h)  Summarised  characterization  of  behavior:  The  following 
brief  description  of  the  objective  behavior  throughout  the  exper- 
ment  applies  in  general  to  each  subject.  The  first  two  or  three 
trials  consisted  in  a  seemingly  aimless  trying-out  of  paths  that 
offered  themselves,  a  performance  that  strongly  suggested  the 
efforts  of  a  newly-caught  animal  to  escape  from  a  pen.  After 
this  period,  the  procedure  was  as  follows:  (a),  a  tendency  to 
work  over  into  the  general  course  of  the  true  path.  In  doing  so, 
each  subject  entered  various  cul-de-sacs,  to  a  decreasing  extent 
as  he  made  progress.  He  entered  the  cul-de-sacs  directly  by 
turning  off  the  true  path,  evidently  not  being  aware  of  the  mis- 
take until  he  reached  the  blind  end.  The  activity  that  followed 
in  getting  out  of  the  cul-de-sac  was  very  similar  to  that  observed 
in  the  first  few  trials.  It  did  not  cease  by  any  means  when  the 
true  path  was  reached,  (b)  There  was  a  very  general  tendency 
for  the  subject  to  enter  the  same  cul-de-sac  in  this  manner  for 
several  trials  in  succession,  to  drop  it  for  a  number  of  ensuing 
trials,  and  then  to  fall  into  it  again  for  a  time,  (c)  Most  of  the 
subjects,  especially  in  the  first  half-dozen  trials,  would  go  repeated- 
ly to  the  end  of  such  a  long  passage,  as  S  for  instance,  mistake  it 
for  the  blind  ending  of  a  cul-de-sac,  and  retrace,  (d)  The  sub- 
jects early  learned  to  stick  to  one  side  of  the  path  in  certain  re- 
gions, for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  dangerous  places  on  the 
other  side,  or  because  they  had  learned  that  the  first  turn  on  the 
side  followed  was  the  correct  turn  in  the  path,  (e)  A  general 
tendency  was  observed  to  increase  the  speed  of  the  pencil  move- 
ment, (i),  in  familiar  and  safe  segments  of  the  path;  (2),  in 
trial  and  error  attempts  to  escape  from  cul-de-sacs,  or  at  any 
time  when  the  subject  became  hopelessly  confused — not  neces- 
sarily in  cul-de-sacs. 


8  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

The  chief  observable  difference  in  the  behavior  of  the  subjects 
was  in  the  matter  of  speed.  E.  C.  P.  and  H.  F.  A.  made  the 
quickest  movements;  J.  J.  T.  and  G.  M.  F.  moved  the  pencil 
very  slowly.  The  other  subjects  in  this  respect  ranged  between 
these  two  extremes,  each  represented  by  two  subjects.  Each 
subject  established  the  pace  in  the  first  trial  that  was  consistently 
to  characterize  his  behavior  throughout  the  trials. 

(c)  Summarized  consensus  of  introspections:  A  brief  gen- 
eral characterization  of  the  subjective  aspects  of  the  learning 
process,  based  on  unanimous  testimony  given  by  the  subjects, 
will  serve  to  introduce  the  more  detailed  individual  introspective 
reports.  They  all  state  that  the  maze  learning  process  took  the 
form  of  discriminating  and  remembering  a  definite  sequence 
of  turns  and  paths  from  the  confusion  of  experiences  that  char- 
acterized the  first  trials.  Different  turns  and  paths  as  they 
become  learned  acquired  famihar  cues,  due  to:  (a),  the  feeling 
of  arm  position,  as  being  extended  towards  the  left  part  of  the 
maze,  the  upper  part,  etc.;  (b),  kinaesthetic  feelings  of  the 
length  and  direction  of  arm  movement  in  traversing  any  one 
path;  (c),  a  projected  tactual  feeling  at  the  end  of  the  pencil, 
as  it  turned  corners  and  followed  the  paths.  This  element  was 
slightly  emphasized  except  in  the  case  of  J.  W.  H. ;  (d),  the 
image  schema  of  the  maze,  as  checked  up  by  these  various  sense 
factors. 

The  difficulty  of  organizing  an  adequate  control  knowledge 
of  the  true  path  may  be  ascribed  to  two  causes:  (a),  the  great 
initial  difficulty,  that  decreased  as  the  subject  developed  his  con- 
trol, was  a  matter  of  memory.  At  any  given  time  during  a  trial, 
the  subject  could  remember  fairly  well  the  last  consecutive  2-5 
turns  and  paths.  But  it  was  very  hard  to  keep  in  mind  the 
memory  of  the  turns  traversed  earlier,  (b)  The  second  great 
difficulty  was  that  of  discrimination.  The  subject  would  proceed 
on  what  he  was  more  or  less  sure  was  the  true  path,  and  would 
suddenly  find  himself  at  the  blind  ending  of  a  cul-de-sac.  He 
had  no  way  of  telling  which  one  of  the  half  dozen  immediately 
preceding  turns  had  led  him  off  the  true  path,  even  if  he  were 
able  to  remember  them. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  9 

After  the  first  half  dozen  trials,  the  difficulties  became  lo- 
cated at  two  or  three  definite  regions  in  the  maze.  The  subjects 
had  learned  that  certain  segmejnts  were  relatively  free  frorri 
dangerous  situations,  (e.g.,  A-F  and  P-T).  The  running  of 
these  segments  became  habitual,  in  the  sense  that  while  tra- 
versing them,  the  subject's  attention  was  anticipatory,  concerned 
with  difficulties  ahead.  Motor  habit,  and  the  mechanical  con- 
struction of  the  maze  itself,  were  in  this  manner  important  fac- 
tors in  the  learning  process.  The  habit  element  assumed  an 
increasingly  important  role  as  the  trials  were  continued. 

(d)  Summarized  reports  of  the  individiml  subjects  as  re- 
gards the  nature  of  the  learmng  process:  In  the  following  re- 
ports, the  data  bearing  upon  the  learning  method  have  been 
abstracted  from  the  complete  introspections. 

(i)  Subject  H.  F.  A.  At  the  completion  of  the  first  trial, 
he  had  a  scheme  of  the  path  in  mind  that  he  represented  by  the 
drawing  [Fig.  2].  He  adopted  in 
this  trial,  and  followed  consistently 
throughout  the  experiment,  a  work- 
ing method  which  he  describes  as 
that  of  "conscious  trial  and  error". 


Each  day  he  attempted  to  work  over  ^^^^^  ^  Drawing  of  Xormal 
m  the  general  direction  he  knew  the  Maze,  end  of  first  trial,  H.F.A. 
path  to  extend,  with  the  aid  of  the  memory  of  such  specific 
segments  as  he  could  retain.  He  would  follow  any  given  path 
to  the  end,  the  "bump".  There  he  might  or  might  not  get  a 
cue  for  the  proper  turn,  a  kinaesthetic  memory  experience.  If  he 
got  it,  and  it  turned  out  to  be  the  correct  one,  well  and  good; 
if  not,  he  would  work  around  in  haphazard  fashion,  and  eventu- 
ally recover  his  bearings.  He  made  no  special  attempt  to  reason 
out  situations,  or  to  fomiulate  plans  or  theories.  He  did  con- 
sciously attempt  to  discriminate  and  remember.  He  thinks 
he  learned  the  maze,  "as  a  rat  learns  it — assuming  that  it  is 
conscious — by  a  trial  and  error  method,  and  an  associative 
memory  control."  Furthermore,  he  employed  the  same  cues 
that  a  rat  presumably  utilizes — kinaesthetic  and  tactual 
experiences. 


10  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

(2)  Subject  M.  R.  F.  She  purposely  adopted  on  the  start  a 
trial  and  error  method,  but  with  this,  in  the  first  trial,  and 
throughout  the  ensuing  trials,  she  assumed  a  decidedly  rational, 
thinking  attitude  towards  her  task.  She  conceived  the  idea, 
(I),^  of  exploring  one  side  at  a  time,  but  it  did  not  prove  to  be 
a  successful  procedure.  The  results  of  trials  (I-IV)  were  gen- 
eral orientation — the  general  spacial  relations  were  learned  first. 
Like  H.  F.  A.  (and  other  subjects)  she  was  alertly  on  the  lookout 
for  familiar  passages,  but  she  made  more  elaborate  anticipatory 
judgments  and  plans — "The  next  time  I  reach  this  corner,  I  am 
going  to  turn  north  and  see  what  happens."  At  (IV)  she 
started  out  with  the  general  working  idea  to  eliminate  useless 
movements.  She  planned,  for  instance,  to  avoid  a  "bad  place" 
on  the  right  by  trying  to  find  a  new  path  around  it.  She  thinks 
about  the  maze  as  she  learns,  in  verbal  terms,  sometimes  spoken 
aloud,  such  as :  "Never  went  up  here  so  far  before ;  yes,  this 
is  O.  K. ;  guess  I'll  try  this  path  to-day."  By  trial  (XVI)  she 
believed  there  were  four  different  paths  in  the  maze;  just  how 
much  is  common  route,  she  doesn't  know.  She  thinks  possibly 
the  maze  is  being  altered  as  she  learns.  (The  experimenter  was 
extremely  careful  in  the  preliminary  directions  to  state  that 
there  might  or  might  not  be  more  than  one  true  path.  He 
made  no  mention  of  possible  alterations  during  the  learning.) 
The  whole  process  was  largely  a  series  of  discoveries  and  guesses. 
She  used  conscious  exploration  to  check  up  her  theories,  but 
exploration  almost  inevitably  resulted  in  getting  hopelessly  lost. 
In  (XXII)  she  found  herself  in  a  familiar  cul-de-sac,  6-9,  and 
recognized  it,  but  was  sure  she  escaped  from  it  by  a  new  path. 
By  (XXVIII)  she  is  firmly  convinced  that  there  is  more  than 
one  path — stated  that  while  she  used  to  come  down  a  long  path 
in  the  middle  of  the  maze,  (L),  for  the  last  three  or  four  trials 
she  has  been  entering  it  from  the  right,  at  a  place  much  lower 
down  than  usual — that  is,  the  path  is  perceptibly  shorter  than 
it  formerly  was.  Therefore,  she  concluded,  there  are  two  ways 
of  getting  into  it,  and  therefore  two  paths  in  the  right  part  of 
the  maze.  She  hit  upon  the  idea  of  learning  one  of  the  paths  in 
^  The  Roman  numerals  in  parentheses  refer  to  the  number  of  the  trials. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  n 

the  maze,  and  letting  the  others  go.  At  (XXXIII)  she  has 
the  situation  under  control^ — that  is,  she  can  go  through  one  of 
her  paths  without  error.  At  the  conclusion  of  the  experiment,  she 
had  not  discovered  the  the  nature  of  the  other  paths;  but  tech- 
nically the  maze  was  learned. 

The  reports  of  this  subject  present  a  distinct  contrast  to  those 
of  H.  F.  A.  Her  attitude  was  consistently  a  more  rational  one. 
She  did  more  thinking  about  the  problem.  But  she  reports  that 
practically  her  learning  was  by  the  method  of  trial  and  error, 
that  the  discoveries  she  made  which  were  of  vital  importance 
were  more  or  less  accidently  hit  upon. 

(3)  Subject  E.  C.  P.  This  subject  was  our  most  consistent 
and  exclusive  visualizer,  and  her  overt  aim  from  the  start  was 
to  build  up  a  visual  image  of  the  maze  path  for  the  purpose  of 
control.  To  the  extent  that  she  accomplished  this,  she  made 
progress  in  the  learning.  In  (I)  she  became  conscious  that  she 
was  in  the  right  side  of  the  maze,  and  started  to  work  over  to  the 
left.  Her  whole  subjective  process  went  on  in  terms  of  building 
up  and  reconstructing  this  visual  pattern.  The  general  shape 
was  developed  first,  i.e.,  (IV)  "The  path  is  of  the  form  of  the 
capital  M."  Her  attitude  was  consistently  one  of  active  atten- 
tion, discrimination,  and  memorizing.  At  times  she  attempted 
to  follow  tentatively  a  few  working  ideas — like  M.  R.  F.,  she 
attempted  to  "dodge"  the  cul-de-sac  region  on  the  right  by 
trying  to  work  around  it.  But  she  does  not  report  much  syste- 
matic thinking  or  planning.  Her  procedure  was  to  go  ahead, 
learn  what  she  could  by  experience,  and  construct  out  of  it  as 
best  she  was  able  her  control  image.  She  aimed  to  make  her 
actual  movements  as  rapid  as  possible,  to  go  cautiously  in  cer- 
tain regions,  but  to  depend  upon  excess  motor  activity  as  the 
best  method  of  procedure.  By  (XXIII)  she  had  a  schematic 
visual  image  of  the  path,  accurate  as  far  as  the  correct  sequence 
of  turns  is  concerned.  The  errors  she  made  after  this  trial  were 
due,  she  thinks,  to  careless  attention. 

This  subject's  account  offers  points  of  similarity  to  the  reports 
of  both  H.  F.  A.  and  M.  R.  F.,  but  it  seems  to  represent  a  third 
distinct  type  of  method.     Without  the  excess  play  of  ideas  of 


12  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

M.  R.  F.,  she  had  that  subject's  attitude  of  active,  concentrated 
attention  and  mental  effort.  In  this  respect  she  was  a  pronounced 
contrast  to  H.  F.  A.,  who  from  a  comparison  of  the  respective 
reports,  seemed  mentally  more  careless.  Like  him,  however, 
she  adopted  a  method  characterized  by  its  emphasis  upon  excess 
random  activity,  as  the  result  of  which  the  correct  paths  could 
be  selected  and  retained. 

(4)  Subject  M.  H.  S.  H.  The  general  working  method  of 
this  subject  is  rather  difficult  to  characterize.  A  rather  exten- 
sive rational  procedure  that  she  indulged  in,  in  connection  with 
learning  to  avoid  a  certain  cul-de-sac,  is  described  in  an  ensuing 
section  of  the  account  of  this  experiment.  Her  testimony  is  to 
the  effect  that  she  proceded  as  a  rule  cautiously,  with  her  atten- 
tion alert  for  kinaesthetic  cues.  Her  aim  was  to  build  up  a 
control,  in  terms  of  a  sequence  of  anticipatory  motor  images. 
This  called  for  a  rather  active  process  of  attending  closely  to 
kinaesthetic  experiences,  selecting  out  of  them  the  ones  concerned 
with  sections  of  the  true  path,  and  organizing  these  into  an  ade- 
quate idea  of  the  route.  She  indulged  freely  in  verbal  expressions, 
spoken  aloud  during  the  trial,  but  they  were  predominately  by 
way  of  comment  and  exclamation,  rather  than  description  or  sys- 
tematic thinking. 

(5)  Subject  J.  W.  H.  The  reports  of  J.  W.  H.  as  to  method 
are  very  similar  to  those  of  E.  C.  P.  They  differ  radically 
in  one  respect.  This  subject  tended  to  rely  upon  motor  habits  as 
soon  as  they  appeared,  and  let  consciousness  concern  itself  with 
other  parts  of  the  maze,  or  with  extraneous  matters,  while 
E.  C.  P.  put  less  emphasis  upon  the  habit  element  than  any  other 
subject.  She  seemed  to  attend  consistently  to  her  visual  scheme 
of  the  maze  while  traversing  it. 

(6)  Subject  G.  M.  F.  This  subject  differed  from  all  the 
others  in  developing  an  auditory-verbal  formula  as  a  control  of 
the  maze.  In  the  actual  constructing  of  this  set  of  verbal  di- 
rections however,  she  used  the  type  of  kinaesthetic  processes  and 
imagery  described  by  M.  H.  S.  H.,  and  employed  them  in  much 
the  same  way.  That  is,  she  did  her  thinking  in  these  terms,  rather 
than  in  verbal  terms.     She  was  still  more  conservative  than  the 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  13 

subject  just  referred  to  in  the  matter  of  random  exploration. 
Subject  G.  M.  F.  made  very  slow  movements  in  the  maze.  She 
engaged  quite  consciously  in  what  she  called  "wondering"  or 
guessing,  but  made  no  great  effort  to  reason  out  situations.  She 
does  not  report  attempts  to  try  out  different  schemes,  such  as 
sticking  to  one  side,  altering  speed,  etc.  In  one  or  two  instances, 
she  undertook  a  systematic  exploration  of  certain  segments  of 
the  maze,  but  did  not  place  much  emphasis  upon  the  value  of  such 
a  procedure.  She  gave  each  trial  an  attitude  of  close  attention ; 
but  her  mental  activity  seemed  for  the  most  part  to  be  concerned 
with  discriminating  kinaesthetic  experiences,  translating  them 
into  her  verbal  fomiula,  and  memorizing  that  formula. 

(7)  Subject  J.  J.  T.  The  introspections  of  this  subject  indi- 
cate more  fluctuations  and  irregularities  than  those  of  any  other 
learner.  For  the  most  part  she  put  her  active  attention  upon  her 
task,  but  in  several  reports  "relaxed  attention"  is  the  predomi- 
nant theme.  Like  the  other  subjects  she  was  on  the  lookout  for 
familiar  cues,  and  in  seeking  them  she  put  the  emphasis  upon 
the  "long  sweeps."  She  made  no  special  effort  at  thinking  out 
situations.  She  did  at  times  attempt  rather  systematic  explora- 
tion. But  several  times  she  indulged  in  what  she  called  "willful 
and  malicious"  exploration :  that  is,  with  no  special  motive  in 
view  except  curiosity.  All  of  her  explorations  she  reported 
futile.  She  did  some  theorizing,  or  rather,  guessing — e.g.,  she 
conceived  at  various  times  that  there  was  more  than  one  path 
in  the  maze.  But  like  G.  M.  F..  she  did  not  develop  her  guesses 
into  theories,  and  systematically  attempt  to  substantiate  them. 

(e)  General  comments  on  the  different  reports  as  to  method: 
It  is  evident  that  the  various  subjects  took  different  attitudes 
towards  their  problem.  By  attitude  we  mean  simply  the  learning 
method  the  subject  attempted  to  apply.  Two  opjxDsed  attitudes 
can  be  fairly  well  defined,  in  the  light  of  the  data  given.  One 
represents  a  more  active,  volitional  attempt  at  thinking  than  does 
the  other.  The  data  also  suggest  another  possible  basis  for  a 
distinction  of  attitudes.  Eliminating  the  matter  of  the  amount 
of  thinking,  some  of  the  subjects  seemed  to  concentrate  their  at- 
tention upon  the  problem  more  than  did  others.     On  the  basis  of 


14  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

the  first  distinction  we  contrasted  H.  F.  A  and  M.  R.  F. ;  on 
the  grounds  of  the  second,  E.  C.  P.  and  J.  J.  T.  It  is  to  be 
emphasized  that  these  distinctions  are  decidedly  relative  ones, 
but  the  introspective  records  seem  to  justify  a  tentative  classifi- 
cation on  these  bases. 

Assuming  that  there  are  differences  in  attitude,  in  the  way 
the  term  is  defined  above,  the  question  is  strongly  suggested,  do 
these  attitudes  represent  actual  psychological  differences  in 
method?  Each  subject  effected  a  process  of  mental  organiza- 
tion of  experiences  that  functioned  in  his  successful  learning  of 
the  maze.  Was  the  nature  of  this  organization  and  application 
of  experiences  essentially  the  same  for  all  the  subjects?  It  is 
significant  that  all  of  them  reported  that  they  had  to  resort  to  a 
trial  and  error  method  sooner  or  later;  but  it  is  quite  possible 
that  they  underestimated  the  importance  of  the  rationalizing 
they  indulged  in.  It  is  conceivable  that  the  adult  human  mind 
functions  in  such  a  way  that  no  other  type  of  mental  behavior 
is  possible  for  this  special  learning  process.  But  it  is  likewise 
possible  that  the  tpind  is  of  such  complexity  that  it  may  approach 
this  type  of  problem  in  a  variety  of  ways.  The  question  was 
thought  important  enough  to  be  made  the  object  of  a  special 
investigation,  which  is  described  in  Experiment  III. 

3.  The  functioning  of  some  of  the  specific  activities 
involved  in  the  learning  process 

(a)  Imagery,  mid  sensory  processes:  No  special  reference  was 
made,  in  the  account  of  method,  to  the  various  types  of  imagery 
employed  by  the  various  subjects.  This  was  made,  however, 
a  special  topic  of  study,  the  motive  being  to  determine  if  possible 
the  relative  efiicacy  of  the  different  types  employed,  provided 
there  were  indications  that  any  one  type  or  combination  showed 
itself  to  be  of  superior  value  in  the  learning  activity.  It  is 
possible  that  in  the  instances  where  any  one  subject  employed 
a  complex  of  different  kinds  of  imagery,  some  of  them  were 
of  functional  importance,  and  some  of  them  merely  accessory. 
The  question  of  how  the  imagery  was  used,  was  deemed  to  be 
of  primary  importance. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  15 

In  onr  attempt  to  determine  the  imagery  employed,  we  availed 
ourselves  of  the  evidence  presented  by  three  lines  of  data:  (a) 
detailed  introspection  on  this  subject  vi^as  called  for  throughout 
the  experiment;  (b)  an  attempt  was  made  to  check  this  up  by 
some  objective  tests,  after  the  experiment  was  concluded;  (c) 
one  of  the  subjects  was  at  the  time  of  the  investigation  engaged 
in  research  on  the  problem  of  imagery  diagnosis,  in  which  she 
employed  many  of  the  introspectors  who  learned  the  mazes.  Our 
records  were  checked  up  with  the  analysis  she  had  made  at 
the  time.^ 

We  had  represented  among  our  subjects  a  rather  inclusive 
variety  of  image  processes,  complicated  in  all  instances  with 
sensory  activities.  The  experience  of  tracing  the  path  through 
a  pencil  maze  necessarily  elicits  kinaesthetic  and  tactual  factors. 
It  was  not  to  our  purpose  in  every  instance  to  distinguish  sharply 
between  the  two  factors,  but  we  attempted  to  do  so  when  there 
appeared  any  functional  reason  for  the  analysis. 

(i)  Characterization  of  the  subjects  with  reference  to 
imaginal  and  sensory  elements  employed:  (i)  J.  W.  H.  Quite 
sensitive  to  tactual  processes  in  the  maze.  Utilized  a  strong 
sense  of  egocentric  projection — the  tactual  feeling  projected  to 
the  end  of  the  pencil.  Less  conscious  of  kinaesthetic  factors. 
On  the  basis  of  these  experiences  he  developed  visual  imagery 
for  certain  segments  of  the  maze,  and  employed  the  tactual- 
visual  complex  as  his  conscious  control. 

(ii)  M.  H.  S.  H.  A  very  pronounced  and  almost  exclusive 
consciousness  of  kinaesthetic  processes.  While  actually  engaged 
in  going  through  the  maze  her  active  attention  was  upon,  (a),  the 
motor  sensations  from  the  hand  and  arm,  and  to  a  less  extent, 
from  the  body;  (b),  the  unambiguous  anticipatory  imagery  of 
the  turn-to-come.  We  were  not  interested  to  determine  whether 
this  was  purely  imaginal  or  in  part  sensory  in  its  make-up.  It 
was  a  definite  kinaesthetic  anticipation  of  the  segments  of  the 
path  immediately  in  front  of  her,  including  one  or  at  most  two 
turns,  of  a  more  inclusive  segment  of  the  maze.     Her  idea  of  the 

^  M.  R.  Fernald;  The  Diagnosis  of  Mental  Imagery,  Psjchol.  Rev., 
Monog.,  Suppl.,  1912,  vol.  XIV,  No.  i. 


i6  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

maze  was  built  up  in  terms  of  this  kinaesthetic  experience.  Her 
learning,  in  its  subjective  aspect,  involved  the  process  of  discrim- 
inating the  sensory  experiences  concerned  with  the  true  path, 
retaining  them,  and  applying  them  in  the  form  of  anticipatory 
images  in  succeeding  trials. 

(iii)  G.  M.  F.  was  like  M.  H.  S.  H.  in  having  strong  motor 
imagery,  and  in  being  primarily  conscious  of  kinaesthetic  sensory 
experiences  while  running  the  maze.  She  was  peculiar  among 
all  the  subjects  in  that  she  built  up,  as  she  learned,  a  specific 
auditory-verbal  formula,  which,  as  checked  up  by  the  motor 
imagery,  served  for  a  guide.  She  testified  that  she  could  not 
dispense  with  this  formula,  even  during  the  last  trials. 

(iv)  M.  R.  F.  employed  a  mixture  of  "vague,  fleeting  visual, 
scattered  verbal,  and  indefinite  motor  imagery."  At  times  one 
element  would  temporarily  predominate.  As  a  rule  she  was  un- 
able to  determine  the  relative  importance  or  extent  of  the  differ- 
ent components  in  the  complex. 

(v)  E.  C.  P.  was  a  very  definite  and  practically  exclusive 
visualizer.  She  built  up  a  clear-cut  visual  image  of  the  maze, 
which  she  describes  as  schematic,  in  the  sense  that  it  was  com- 
posed of  "lines,"  rather  than  being  an  image  of  an  actual  wood 
maze,  of  any  certain  color,  etc.  Like  G.  M.  F.,  she  used  her 
image  as  a  guide  for  every  trial,  and  ventured  the  opinion  towards 
the  close  of  the  trials  that  she  could  never  run  through  the  maze 
without  it. 

(vi)  J.  J-  T.  found  it  difficult  to  introspect  on  her  imagery. 
She  was  conscious  of  kinaesthetic  complexes,  but  had  no  definite 
motor  imagery,  and  little  or  no  visual.  She  does  not  think  she 
employs  much  imagery — what  she  knows  about  the  mazes  she 
simply  "knows." 

(vii)  H.  F.  A.  employed  a  kinaesthetic  complex  which  he  did 
not  try  to  analyze  into  its  imaginal  and  sensory  components — 
i.e.,  his  anticipations  of  turns  were  closely  involved  with  the 
turns  themselves.  With  this  he  used  some  verbal  material.  No 
visual  or  tactual. 

(2)  Some  data  on  how  the  imagery  functioned:  The  type  or 
combination  each  individual  employed  was  used  throughout  the 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  17 

experiment,  and  was  the  same  that  the  subjects  reported  in  their 
statements  made  during  the  investigations  of  M.  R.  F.,  referred 
to  above.  There  were  nonradical  attempts  to  shift  from  one 
type  of  process  to  another.  Each  subject  reported  fluctuations 
in  the  amount  used  through  the  trials.  In  general,  when  the 
learner  increased  his  effort  to  concentrate,  or  to  study  out  situa- 
tions, he  reports  an  accentuation  of  image  activities.  To  the 
extent  that  the  learner  relied  upon  the  habit  factor,  the  imagery 
was  lost. 

The  image  activities  were  either  retrospective  or  anticipatory. 
One  aspect  of  the  learning  process  was  the  retention  of  the  seg- 
ments just  traversed;  the  other  was  the  application  of  this  re- 
membered experience  in  a  succeeding  trial  by  way  of  an  antici- 
pation of  the  turn  or  turns  to  come  by  means  of  which  the  subject 
was  successful  in  making  them  correctly. 

There  were  some  differences  reported  as  to  the  amount  of  path 
actually  anticipated.  E.  C.  P.  would  develop  her  image  of  the 
w^bole  route,  or  as  much  of  it  as  she  knew,  before  leaving  the 
starting  box,  after  the  signal  to  begin  had  been  given.  The  two 
or  three  turns  immediately  in  front  of  her  would  be  more  vividly 
expressed,  however,  as  she  went  through  the  maze,  while  the 
"trail"  behind  would  be  practically  ignored.  M.  H.  S.  H.  would 
get  her  image  of  the  turn-to-come  when  half  way  or  two  thirds 
of  the  way  down  the  preceding  path.  The  same  type  of  image 
employed  by  G.  M.  F.  would  usually  include  several  anticipated 
turns;  but  it  was  used  in  connection  with  her  verbal  formula, 
and  included  only  certain  segments  of  the  maze.  She  elaborated 
her  formula  as  she  had  actual  use  for  each  step  in  it  when  going 
through  the  path.  H.  F.  A.  reported  that  his  cues  for  the  turns 
came  as  a  rule  after  the  "bump,"  when  the  end  of  the  path  was 
reached.  The  other  subjects  gave  more  varying  testimony  as 
to  the  extent  of  path  that  was  anticipated. 

It  is  rather  difficult  to  gauge  the  importance  of  the  motor 
element.  One  would  assume  after  reading  the  reports  that  the 
kinaesthetic  processes  played  an  important  role  with  all  the  sub- 
jects, that  the  cue  that  was  focal  with  M.  H.  S.  H.  functioned 
to  some  extent  with  all.    This  would  of  course  imply  a  persistent 


i8  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

relationship  between  the  kinaesthetic  processes  and  motor  habit. 
The  definite  motor  image  cue  which  this  subject  got  some  dis- 
tance ahead  of  the  actual  turn  was  probably  the  same  that  J.  J.  T. 
and  H.  F.  A.  acted  on  in  their  controls;  although  in  their  cases 
it  was  not  acted  on  as  such,  and  it  was  closely  identified  with  the 
actual  act  of  turning.  The  tendency  for  the  whole  kinaesthesis 
to  become  habitual  probably  accounts  for  the  phenomena  of  habit 
reported  almost  universally  in  the  latter  part  of  the  learning. 
The  introspections  seemed  to  indicate  that  the  kinaesthetic  process 
behaved  differently  with  different  subjects,  and  we  have  some 
reason  to  believe  that  it  actually  functioned  to  a  different  relative 
degree  with  dift'erent  subjects.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that 
E.  C.  P.  consistently  reported  that  she  did  not  consciously  utilize 
kinaesthetic  processes  as  a  guide  at  all.  She  was  unique  among 
the  subjects  in  this  respect.  It  is  also  significant  that  she  also 
reported  little  or  no  automatism  or  habit,  again  differing  from 
the  other  subjects.  E.  C.  P.,  it  is  to  be  remembered,  was  our 
most  consistent  visualizer. 

In  general,  as  far  as  our  introspective  data  are  valid,  the 
different  image  processes,  when  represented  in  one  individual, 
reinforced  each  other.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  while 
G.  M.  F.  reported  that  her  verbal  formula  was  her  immediate 
control,  it  is  hardly  sufficiently  explicit  to  guide  a  subject,  un- 
familiar with  the  maze,  through  its  paths.  It  reads,  "Along  in 
this  alley — around  corner — here — straight  up,  going  to  turn 
to  left — now  I  go  down — back  to  right' — now  here  I  must  be 
careful  and  stick  to  upper  side  of  alley,"  etc.  This  is  for  the 
region  A-H.  Evidently  this  set  of  directions  alone  could  scarce- 
ly suffice  for  safe  passage  through  the  maze.  The  inference  is 
that  it  was  probably  reinforced  by  motor  cues,  feelings  of 
familiarity,  etc. 

In  one  or  two  cases  we  found  instances  of  an  image  conflict. 
G.  M.  F.  reports  such  a  case  where  the  formula  told  her  to  go 
one  way,  while  a  motor  image  directed  her  into  an  opposite  path. 
The  verbal  cue  turned  out  to  be  correct.  j\I.  H.  S.  H.  in  two 
instances  reported  a  conflict  of  motor  images.  This  was  after 
she  had  just  learned  to  avoid  a  cul-de-sac,  and  one  tendency  rep- 
resented the  habit  effect. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  19 

(3)  The  question  of  the  relative  efficacy  of  the  different  types 
of  imagery  employed :  It  was  impossible,  after  a  comparison  of 
the  objective  records  and  the  introspections,  to  make  any  positive 
correlations  between  efficiency  and  the  type  of  imagery  used. 
In  the  first  place,  it  is  obvious  that  too  many  complications  enter 
into  the  learning.  Two  of  the  best  learners,  E.  C.  P.  and 
H.  F.  A.,  used  very  divergent  image  processes.  Two  of  the 
subjects  who  employed  similar  image  controls,  H.  F.  A.  and 
M.  H.  S.  H.,  have  extremely  opposed  objective  records. 

After  the  maze  was  once  learned,  any  one  type  of  control  was 
as  efficient  as  any  other,  as  far  as  the  criterion  established  for 
this  experiment  was  concerned.  Evidently,  the  relative  super- 
iority of  any  one  type  of  thought  process,  if  such  existed,  must 
have  asserted  itself  during  the  earlier  part  of  the  learning. 

There  is  some  evidence  to  indicate  that  those  with  predomi- 
nant motor  imagery  tended  to  establish  stronger  motor  habits 
than  the  others.  M.  H.  S.  H.,  in  the  distraction  tests,  to  which 
reference  is  made  later,  was  exceedingly  successful  in  going 
through  the  maze  when  her  attention  was  mainly  concerned  with 
other  things.  E.  P.  C.  failed  in  the  same  test.  But  this  does 
not  by  any  means  imply  that  a  strong  tendency  towards  the 
establishing  of  non-conscious  habits  is  beneficial  in  learning  a 
maze.  Habits  worked  for  harm  as  well  as  for  good.  In  the 
case  of  M.  H.  S.  H.,  a  cul-de-sac  became  incorporated  into  the 
true  path  and  was  habitually  run  for  a  number  of  trials  before  the 
mistake  was  discovered,  each  time  being  responsible  for  a  num- 
ber of  errors. 

It  may  be  that  visual  imagery  is  intrinsically  better  adapted 
to  express  spatial  relations  than  kinaesthetic  or  verbal.  It  is 
more  comprehensive — a  verbal  image  must  unroll  itself  in  time, 
as  must  also  kinaesthetic  one,  while  the  visual  image  is  presented 
more  instantaneously.  E.  C.  P.  anticipated  more  of  the  path 
before  reaching  it  than  did  any  other  subject ;  H.  F.  A.  did  less 
than  any  other.     Both  had  good  records. 

The  conclusion  was  strongly  suggested  to  the  experimenter 
in  the  light  of  all  the  data  at  hand,  that  the  learning  depended 
upon  the  ability  of  the  Subject  to  organize  the  experience  pre- 


20  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

sented  by  the  objective  act  of  going  through  the  various  paths 
in  the  maze,  rather  than  upon  any  type  of  imagery  employed 
to  retain  these  experiences.  Several  indications  w^ere  found  to 
the  effect  that  different  subjects  used  the  same  kind  of  imagery 
in  different  ways — e.g.,  M.  H.  S.  H.  and  H.  F.  A.  v^ith  motor 
imagery ;  G.  M.  F.  and  M.  R.  F.  used  verbal  material  in  different 
ways. 

{b)  Habit  and  Attention:  Very  early  in  the  series,  in  some 
instances  in  the  first  half-dozen  trials,  subjects  began  to  report 
that  certain  segments  of  the  maze  were  being  run  with  the  atten- 
tion directed  upon  regions  ahead,  or  upon  foreign  matters.  This 
type  of  thing  was  the  more  emphasized  as  the  trials  continued, 
until  various  subjects,  after  the  last  few  trials,  reported  that  most 
of  the  maze  was  traversed  with  focal  attention  wholly  concerned 
with  other  things. 

This  habit  tendency  developed  in  connection  with  two  different 
kinds  of  situation  in  the  maze :  ( i )  certain  segements,  such  as 
A-F,  which  had  presented  relatively  few  opportunities  for  error, 
never  at  any  time  became  the  object  for  much  attention.  Such 
regions  early  were  reported  as  "almost  automatic" — "attention 
concerned  with  the  cul-de-sac  ahead."  Another  type  of  thing 
occurred,  of.  the  same  nature  as  far  as  the  subjective  aspect  of 
it  is  concerned,  of  which  the  reports  of  M.  H.  S.  H.  afforded 
an  excellent  example.  This  subject  incorporated  the  cul-de-sac 
path  6-8-9  into  her  true  path  without  realizing  what  she  had 
done.  Ordinarily,  the  end  of  a  blind  passage  afforded  a  suffi- 
ciently characteristic  cue  to  inform  any  subject  that  he  was  in 
a  cul-de-sac.  In  her  case,  however,  the  passage  to  the  end  and 
back  was  sensed  merely  as  a  turn  in  the  true  path,  and  as 
a  result,  this  part  of  her  path  became  habitual  before  she  dis- 
covered her  mistake.  (2)  In  other  instances,  segments  which 
were  learned  at  considerable  expense  of  attention  and  study 
eventually  became  habitual.  The  path  F-K  was  the  common 
instance  of  this. 

The  behavior  of  attention  has  already  been  referred  to  in 
our  report  of  the  image  processes.  It  either,  (i),  kept  pace 
with    the    actual    activity    in    going   through    the    maze,     (2), 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  21 

"lagged  behind,"  or  was  retrospective,  engaged  in  the  attempt 
to  retain  the  knowledge  just  acquired,  or  (3),  was  anticipa- 
tory. In  a  relative  way,  these  three  types  of  the  play  of  atten- 
tion made  their  appearance  in  the  order  named.  Ordinarily,  the 
progress  of  any  trial,  or  the  traversing  of  any  one  path,  would 
elicit  a  back  and  forth  play  of  attention  between  the  region 
ahead  and  the  "trail"  behind,  checked  up  by  constant  reference 
to  the  path  the  subject  was  actually  engaged  in  making.  This 
behavior  is  characteristic  of  all  the  subjects. 

A  rather  surprising  divergence  of  behavior  in  the  matter  of 
habit  was  in  evidence.  E.  C.  P.  constantly  testified  that  her 
visual  scheme  was  her  control,  and  that  she  employed  it  in  her 
last  trials  as  consciously  as  she  did  in  the  first.  She  was  quite 
sure  that  she  would  never  be  able  to  dispense  with  it.  M.  R.  F. 
also  emphasized  to  a  very  small  extent  the  phenomenon  of 
unconscious  running  of  segments  of  the  maze.  But  this  sub- 
ject was  engaged  in  an  active  series  of  studies  throughout  the 
learning,  while  E.  C.  P.  was  one  of  the  first  to  build  up  an  ade- 
quate idea  of  the  true  path.  G.  M.  F.  reported  her  verbal 
formula  essential  to  the  last. 

In  general,  the  appearance  and  predominance  of  the  phenome- 
non of  unconscious  running  seemed  to  be  correlated  with  the 
relative  reliance  upon  kinaesthetic  factors,  but  J.  W.  H.,  wha 
next  to  E.  C.  P.  employed  visual  imagery,  emphasized  the  habit- 
ual, unconscious  elements  more  than  any  other  subject.  J.  W.  H., 
also,  it  is  to  be  remembered,  reported  on  the  introspective  side 
a  minimum  of  kinaesthetic  processes.  He  thought  they  were 
decidedly  subordinate  to  tactual  ones.  But  M.  H.  S.  H.  who 
relied  so  exclusively  upon  motor  imagery,  while  she  emphasized 
in  her  reports  habitual  running,  maintained  at  the  same  time 
that  it  was  a  conscious  performance.  The  appearance  of  habit 
is  hardly  to  be  ascribed  to  the  number  of  times  the  maze  was 
run.  Those  who  did  report  it,  testified  to  its  appearance  early 
in  the  series.  Neither  is  it  obviously  correlated  with  speed,  as 
a  comparison  of  the  different  behaviors  show  E.  C.  P.  and 
J.  W.  H.  similar  in  this  respect.  It  is  not  to  be  explained  in 
terms  of  the  amount  of  attention  put  into  the  learning  as  a  whole. 


22  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

J.  J.  T.  and  J.  W.  H.,  who  occupy  rather  extreme  positions  in 
this  respect,  both  report  strongly  the  role  of  habit,  in  the  sense  of 
unconscious  running. 

The  data,  by  way  of  summary,  indicate  that  various  subjects 
varied  in  their  reliance  upon  the  habit  factor.  In  the  instances 
of  its  extreme  predominance,  the  subject  could  safely  depend 
upon  it  to  carry  him  through  difficult  regions  of  the  maze  while 
he  was  attending  almost  exclusively  to  extraneous  affairs.  In 
other  cases,  although  habit  facilitated  the  task  of  going  through 
the  maze,  some  attention  to  the  difficulties  in  the  route  was  neces- 
sary. Finally,  two  of  the  subjects  reported  that  an  amount  of 
conscious  attention  was  demanded  in  each  trial,  which  did  not 
seemingly  diminish  as  the  result  of  repetition. 

(c)  Discriviination  and  Association,  Memory  and  Recogni- 
tion: The  processes  involved  in  selecting  segments  of  the  maze 
which  belonged  to  the  true  path  out  of  the  confusion  of  expe- 
riences which  in  the  first  trials  presented  themselves,  and  arrang- 
ing them  in  the  proper  sequence,  obviously  constituted  the  main 
organization  that  the  subject  was  called  on  to  accomplish. 

It  has  already  been  stated  that  certain  passages  early  acquired 
familiar  "tang's,"  due  to  their  direction,  extent,  position,  etc. 
Practically  every  passage  had  something  analogous  to  a  local 
sign,  due  to  the  quality,  strength,  and  combination  of  kinaesthetic 
and  cutaneous  experiences  occasioned  by  the  act  of  traversing  it 
and  attending  to  it.  But  the  subject  had  not  only  to  attend,  but 
to  remember.  At  some  given  time  in  the  early  stage  of  the 
process,  he  would  find  himself  stopped  by  a  blind  ending,  say  the 
termination  of  path  9.  Assuming  that  at  that  moment  he  had 
rather  definitely  in  mind,  in  some  image  form,  the  memory  of 
9-8-6-H-G-F  just  traversed,  he  would  not  necessarily  have  any 
cue  as  to  which  of  the  turns  between  these  passages  had  led  him 
off  the  true  path  and  into  the  cul-de-sac.  This  was  the  type  of 
difficulty  reported  universally.  Add  to  this  situation  the  fact 
that  in  the  earlier  trials  the  subject  had  in  mind  only  a  confused 
memory  blur  of  the  immediate  past  experiences,  and  the  nature  of 
the  conscious  side  of  the  learning  is  easy  to  conceive. 

The  learner  had  two  things  to  do  in  such  an  exigency.     He 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  23 

must  in  the  first  place  escape  from  the  situation.  In  many  in- 
stances, especially  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  learning,  he  deliber- 
ately resorted  to  a  random  trial  and  error  method,  letting  any 
attempt  to  get  a  mental  hold  on  the  situation  go  where  it  would. 
But  if  he  were  to  build  up  an  adequate  knowledge  of  the  path,  he 
must  in  addition  learn  how  in  the  future  to  avoid  such  a 
situation. 

It  was  then  the  concern  of  the  subject  to  retrace,  attend  closely 
to  his  cues,  and  recognize  the  regained  path  as  soon  as  possible. 
The  chances  are  that  in  doing  so  he  would  go  into  7  and  back. 
Retracing  from  there  (possibly  reentering  9)  he  would  finally 
find  6,  turn  either  into  H  or  continue  I,  and  make  a  number  of 
ensuing  turns  before  he  found  his  bearings.  Possibly  in  the 
next  trial,  in  an  attempt  to  escape  from  this  region,  he  would 
turn  down  4.  At  the  end  of  5  he  would  find  himself,  of  course, 
worse  off  than  he  was  in  the  previous  trial. 

There  were  two  methods  in  evidence  by  which  the  subject 
learned  to  avoid  this  cul-de-sac  6-9.  One  was  the  actual  process 
of  learning  the  whole  situation  by  repeated  exploration.  The 
other  was  the  result  of  turning  directly  from  H  to  I  by  accident, 
without  at  the  time  recognizing  it  as  the  correct  thing  to  do, 
remembering  this  variation  in  the  route,  and  afterwards  ignoring 
passage  6.  In  this  case  the  cul-de-sac  was  not  learned  at  all.  6 
was  simply  the  opening  from  clear  sailing  into  an  unknown 
region  of  danger.  This  process  of  falling  into  difficulties  and 
learning  how  to  avoid  the  place  on  the  true  path  that  was  the 
location  of  the  difficulty,  called  for  the  discriminating,  associat- 
ing, memorizing  processes.  But  it  was  obvious  that  two  subjects 
could  learn  to  avoid  the  same  region  by  two  methods,  one  of 
which  called  for  a  more  active  play  of  these  processes  than  the 
other.  Unfortunately,  the  subject,  although  he  was  aware  of 
the  two  methods  of  escaping  difficulties,  could  not  choose  be- 
tween them.  The  second  type  of  thing  was  invariably  accidental, 
or  due  to  causes  which  his  introspection  did  not  comprehend. 

Thus  while  specific  acts  of  memory  and  discrimination  en- 
tered into  the  learning  process,  they  did  not  constitute  it.  The 
background  of  preconceptions,  the  effect  of  habit,  the  play  of 


24  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

ideational  activity,  all  entered  into  the  mental  organizing  in- 
volved in  these  relatively  simple  forms  of  learning.  The  experi- 
menter devised  a  series  of  extended  tests  designed  to  guage  the 
ability  of  the  different  subjects  in  the  matter  of  sensory  discrim- 
ination and  memory,  under  conditions  as  similar  to  those  involved 
in  Experiment  I  as  possible.  The  results  of  these  tests  offered 
no  basis  for  an  explanation  of  the  efficiency  in  the  maze.  As 
was  noted  above,  E.  C.  P.  was  able  to  describe  the  path  before  it 
was  technically  learned.  J.  J.  T.,  when  the  experiment  was  com- 
pleted, was  not  able  to  describe  accurately  the  sequence  of  turns. 
The  relative  lengths  of  paths  were  grossly  distorted,  even  in 
regions  where  the  path  had  been  carefully  worked  out,  by  all 
the  subjects. 

{d)  Illusions:  It  is  convenient  to  make  reference  under  a 
separate  heading  to  the  fact  that  the  number  and  nature  of  the 
misconceptions  the  subject  formed  of  the  maze  were  startling. 
Lengths  of  paths  were  over-  or  underestimated  frequently  by 
one  half.  Certain  areas  of  the  maze  were  violently  distorted  as 
to  position  and  relative  size.  The  fact  has  already  been  referred 
to  that  one  subject  believed  in  the  existence  of  four  different 
paths  in  the  maze.  This  may  not  properly  be  called  an  illusion, 
but  we  found  it  impossible  to  establish  boundary  lines  between 
errors  in  sensory  discrimination,  illusions,  and  misconceptions 
due  to  guesses  or  theories. 

That  these  illusions  often  played  a  definite  role,  generally  to 
the  detriment  of  the  subject's  control  over  the  learning,  is  evident 
from  the  reports.  Sometimes  an  immediate  increase  in  time  and 
errors  resulted,  but  often  the  objective  records  show  nothing 
of  the  misconception.  H.  F.  A.  (VII)  ran  up  15  errors  due  to 
the  fact  that  he  first  noticed  in  this  trial  that  M  was  a  relatively 
long  path:  he  had  always  considered  it  a  short  path,  or  rather, 
had  not  had  his  attention  called  to  it  at  all.  At  this  trial  he 
entered  it,  was  surprised  at  its  length,  concluded  he  was  astray, 
and  retraced,  in  an  attempt  to  find  the  path  he  formerly  took 
in  getting  from  L  to  the  left  side  of  the  maze.  M.  R.  F.'s  concep- 
tion of  the  four  paths  resulted  in  needless  exploration,  and  her 
error  and  time  curves  were  correspondingly  enlarged.     J.  J.  T. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  25 

(X)  found  the  relative  proportions  of  the  passages  in  the  right 
side  of  the  maze  distorted,  but  since  her  idea  of  the  sequence 
was  unaltered,  the  discovery  made  no  appreciable  difference  in 
her  records.  G.  M.  F.  (VI)  decided  that  there  were  two  routes 
from  the  entrance  to  the  exit.  In  this  case,  the  judgment  was  the 
result  of  a  careful  exploration  of  the  region.  After  the  judgment 
was  formed,  however,  it  did  not  influence  her  error  records,  for 
she  simply  followed  up  whichever  path  she  "happened  to  be  on" 
in  this  region,  and  since  there  was  only  one,  her  record  is  clear. 

As  for  the  cause  of  these  illusions,  the  introspections  seem  to 
indicate  the  following :  ( i )  errors  in  pure  sensory  discrimination ; 
and,  (2),  the  fact  that  the  attention  frequently  became  focal  at 
times  in  passages  usually  run  without  definite  notice.  Hence 
the  subject  perceived  things  he  had  been  blind  to  before,  and 
assumed  that  he  was  in  a  new  situation. 

{e)  Affection  and  Emotion:  The  process  of  learning  the  maze 
elicited  at  times  affective  reactions  that  in  some  cases  obviously 
influenced  the  progress  of  the  subject.  There  were  sufficiently 
in  evidence,  as  one  would  assume,  the  feeling  of  discouragement 
in  times  of  difficulty,  and  the  corresponding  state  of  elation  when 
the  difficulty  was  overcome. 

The  extremely  disagreeable,  hopeless  feeling  of  being  baffied 
very  often  resulted  in  a  definite  change  of  activity  or  method. 
Repeatedly,  the  subjects  would  find  themselves  in  cul-de-sacs, 
would  try  at  some  length  to  extricate  themselves  by  a  study  and 
exploration  of  the  region,  and  would  then  resort  in  disgust  to  a 
random  trial  and  error  procedure  in  an  effort  to  escape  at  any 
cost.  It  was  extremely  difficult  to  gauge  the  practical  effect  of 
this  method.  Quite  often  it  resulted  in  discoveries  of  pennanent 
value. 

In  one  or  two  cases  excitement  over  personal  affairs  distracted 
the  subject's  attention  and  the  learning  process  suffered  accord- 
ingly. Thus  E.  C.  P.  had  just  passed  the  German  examination 
required  of  candidates  for  the  doctor's  degree  a  half  hour  before 
trial  VII,  and  was  in  a  state  of  considerable  elation.  Her  record 
that  day  includes  75  errors,  the  most  made  by  any  subject  in  any 
trial. 


26  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

This  affective  aspect  showed  itself  most  usefully  in  the  incen- 
tive for  quick  learning.  The  sense  of  rivalry  among  the  subjects 
was  acute,  and  the  learning  was  almost  literally  regarded  as  a 
test  of  intelligence.  The  experimenter  kept  each  of  the  subjects 
sufficiently  informed  of  the  progress  of  the  other  learners  to  main- 
tain this  motive  at  a  working  level. 

(/)  Thinking  and  Reasoning:  The  reports  of  all  the  subjects 
have  implied  in  them  something  more  than  the  specific  activities 
referred  to  in  the  preceding  sections.  Various  indications  have 
already  been  given  to  the  effect  that  the  kind  of  mental  organiza- 
tion elicited  was  of  an  exceedingly  complex  sort.  In  some  cases 
this  amounted  to  overt  attemipts  at  logical  reasoning;  in  all  in- 
stances it  seemed  to  have  involved  in  it  the  rudiments  of  the 
higher  thought  processes. 

While  the  problem  was  one  in  which  a  minimum  of  direct 
experiential  background  could  be  drawn  upon  by  the  subject,  he 
nevertheless  did  avail  himself  of  the  general  intelligence  of 
human  experience,  in  a  way  that  an  animal  could  not  possibly  do. 

His  general  attitude,  in  the  first  place,  was  that  of  a  learner 
who  knows  he  has  a  problem  to  solve^ — certainly  a  rather  impor- 
tant factor  when  one  considers  that  the  active  effort  of  the  learner 
was  the  thing  that  primarily  characterized  his  activities. 

Numerous  specific  reports  indicated  that  the  subject  was  able 
to  call  to  his  aid  knowledge  of  a  more  general  sort,  and  that  he 
was  able  to  conceive  of  working  schemes  not  elaborated  as  the 
result  of  actual  experience  in  the  maze.  Thus  E.  C.  P.  (IV) 
said  the  path  was  of  the  shape  of  the  capital  M.  M.  R.  F.  on  the 
start  conceived  the  idea  of  exploring  one  side  of  the  path  first. 

An  example  of  the  realization  and  solution  of  a  difficulty  in 
a  way  that  disclosed  the  attempt  to  rationalize  the  problem,  and 
the  amount  of  trial  and  error  actually  employed  in  its  solution,  is 
found  in  the  experience  of  M.  H.  S.  H.,  which  is  different  from 
a  number  of  instances  given  only  inasmuch  as  it  was  more 
extended,   and  was  elaborated  more  consciously. 

During  the  first  twenty  trials,  almost  without  exception,  this 
subject  went  daily  into  cul-de-sac  6-7-8-9.  During  this  time 
she  constantly  reported  a  tendency  for  familiar  parts  of  the  route 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  27 

to  drop  into  the  habit  class.  Until  about  (XXV)  she  would  go 
into  this  cul-de-sac  every  day,  and  retrace  out  of  it,  under  the 
impression  that  she  had  made  no  errors.  By  (XXV),  however, 
some  cue  given  at  the  end  of  9  made  her  aware  of  what  she  had 
been  doing.  She  immediately  began  to  study  the  situation. 
Since  she  had  incorporated  this  into  her  true  path — so  she  rea- 
soned— how  was  she  going  to  avoid  it,  since  she  did  not  know 
how  much  of  the  territory  was  cul-de-sac  region?  And  since 
the  cul-de-sac  runs  "up"  (she  meant  of  course  either  6  or  9) 
and  the  true  path  also  runs  in  the  same  direction,  how  was  she 
going  to  be  able  to  tell  which  was  which  ?  Her  conception  of  the 
situation,  as  she  explained,  was  that  she  gets  into  the  cul-de-sac 
by  turning  up  from  some  point  on  the  true  path.  From  (XXVI) 
to  (XXXI)  the  conditions  of  affairs  did  not  change.  She  had 
no  feeling  of  being  in  error  until  she  reached  the  end  of  9,  and 
practically  restated  her  reasoning  process :  "I  have  to  turn  up 
to  get  out  of  the  thing,  this  cul-de-sac  also  turns  up,  so  there  is 
no  way  to  tell  which  is  cul-de-sac  and  which  is  true  path." 

Curiously  enough,  in  (XXIX)  she  ran  the  maze  without 
error,  but  reported  the  whole  affair  as  almost  unconscious,  and 
she  was  therefore  unable  to  explain  how  she  escaped  from  the 
cul-de-sac. 

At  (XXXII)  the  scheme  occurred  to  her  to  avoid  the  region 
by  turning  up  sooner  in  the  path :    "Will  try  this  next  time."    In 

(XXXIII)  she  tried  it  but  found  no  path,  (i.e.,  in  H)  leading 
in  that  direction.  However,  she  said  at  the  end  of  this  trial  that 
the  plan  seemed  logically  sound,  so  she  would  try  it  again.     In 

(XXXIV)  she  attempted  it  once  more,  with  the  same  result, 
and  reported,  "Tomorrow  I  will  turn  down  sooner  than  usual." 
(That  is,  some  path  that  would  lead  from  H  to  L,  turning 
down  from  H.)  This  also  failed.  In  (XXXVI)  she  got  half 
way  down  6,  when  the  idea  occurred  to  her  that  she  had  gone 
past  the  customary  path  downwards,  that  she  was  now  in  a  new 
region,  and  that  she  had,  therefore,  better  retrace. 

In  her  next  trial,  the  true  situation  occurred  to  her :  not  to 
turn  down  at  all,  in  the  path  G-J.  This  solution  of  the  problem 
came  as  the  result  of  the  fact  that  she  had  unintentionally  and 


28  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

accidently  turned  up  in  the  trial  previously  made,  and  avoided 
the  cul-de-sac. 

This  report  suggested  to  the  experimenter  the  advisability  of 
making  the  amount  of  reasoning  possible  in  such  a  situation  the 
object  of  a  more  extended  study,  and  with  that  purpose  in  view, 
the  third  experiment  was  designed. 

4.      A  COMPARISON  OF  THE  SUBJECTIVE  ASPECTS  OF  THE  LEARNING 
PROCESS   WITH   THE   OBJECTIVE   RECORDS 

The  criterion  of  five  consecutive  trials  without  error  as  an 
indication  that  the  maze  was  learned  was  an  entirely  arbitrary 
one,  even  if  the  subjective  aspects  were  not  considered  at  all. 
Had  the  test  been  four  trials,  G.  M.  F.  would  have  had  the 
maze  learned  at  trial  XVII  instead  of  at  XXIII.  If  the  standard 
had  been  determined  at  six  trials,  E.  C.  P.  would  have  needed 
at  least  six  extra  trials.  Several  subjects  ran  occasional  perfect 
trials  in  the  earlier  stages  of  the  learning,  before  they  were  able 
to  approximate  a  detailed  description  of  the  maze — E.  C.  P.,  XI; 
G.  M.  F.,  XIV;  J.  J.  T.,  XIV;  H.  F.  A.,  VI;  J.  W.  H.,  XII; 
M.  R.  F.,  XIV. 

Had  a  psychological  criterion  been  attempted  to  determine 
when  the  maze  was  learned,  e.g.,  the  standard  of  ability  to 
describe  the  true  path,  the  test  would  have  been  just  as  arbitrary. 
With  any  subjective  standard,  the  time  and  error  records  would 

be  different  from  those  based 
upon  the  objective  test  adopt- 
ed— the  number  of  trials 
would  have  been  increased  for 
some,  decreased  for  others. 
E.  C.  P.  described  the  true 
path  accurately  at  the  close  of 
trial  XXIII.  H.  F.  A.,  when 
Figure  3.  Drawing  of  Normal  Maze,  ^^e  maze  was  technically  learn- 
when  learned,  J.  J.  T.  ,      ,  . 

ed,  described  b   as  extendmg 

up  from  E  instead  of  down,  turning  to  the  right,  and  then 
turning  down  to  meet  H.  J-  J-  T.  drew  the  reproduced 
diagram   [Fig.  3]   to  represent  all  she  knew  of  the  true  path, 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  29 

after  she  had  run  it  five  times  in  succession  without  error. 
M.  R.  F.  could  describe  the  proper  sequence  of  turns,  but 
she  still  had  the  idea  of  other  paths  leading  from  the  entrance 
to  the  exit.  The  fact  is  also  to  be  noted  that  early  in  the  series 
most  of  the  subjects  were  able  to  describe  most  of  the  path — 
in  the  stage  represented  by  trails  VII-XV. 

The  essence  of  the  explanation  of  the  irregularity  consists  in 
the  fact  that  to  each  subject  the  maze  was  a  series  of  definite  and 
relatively  isolated  problems,  rather  than  one  problem.  The 
number  of  these  special  points  of  difficulty  had  as  a  rule  dwindled 
down  to  one  or  two  after  the  first  VII-XII  trails.  From  that 
stage  on  the  attention  was  mainly  concerned  with  these  specific  re- 
gions of  trouble,  while  the  rest  of  the  path  became  almost 
automatic. 

It  is  evident  that  the  curve  does  not  at  any  stage  represent  the 
development  of  the  subject's  knowledge  of  the  maze  path.  A 
sudden  increase  in  errors  and  time  may  indicate  merely  that 
the  subject  had  seen  fit  to  do  some  exploring,  at  the  sacrifice 
of  voluntarily  playing  havoc  with  his  record:  M.  R.  F.,  XXI; 
J.  J.  T.,  VIII;  G.  M.  F.,  VI.  Sometimes  these  explorations  were 
productive  of  good  results,  sometimes  not.  Again,  a  sudden 
jump  upwards  of  the  time  and  error  curves  was  the  result  of 
careless  accident — the  subject  through  lack  of  attention  would 
slip  into  a  cul-de-sac,  even  when  he  knew  exactly  the  location  of 
its  entrance.  Once  in,  he  would  get  temporarily  confused,  and 
would  escape  often  only  after  a  trial  and  error  expedient.  An 
example  of  this  is  J.  W.  H.  In  this  and  in  other  cases,  the 
attention  had  been  uniformly  concerned  with  the  trial,  but  had 
suffered  a  temporary  relapse.  In  other  instances,  a  bad  record 
was  the  result  of  general  laxity  of  attention  throughout  an  entire 
trial,  or  its  direction  to  some  extraneous  affair. 

The  difficulty  of  the  correlation  of  efficiency  as  measured  by 
the  total  time  involved  in  learning  the  maze,  and  the  total  num- 
ber of  errors  made,  is  obvious  from  a  glance  at  the  following 
table.  In  the  first  place,  this  objective  standard  of  efficiency 
is  ambiguous.  Time  and  error  records  represent  only  two  of 
various  possible  criteria.     The  total   amount   of   distance   tra- 


30  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

versed  in  the  maze  is  a  possible  standard.     Again,  there  are  dif- 
ferent methods  of  computing  errors. 

The  total  of  the  time  and  errors  expended  by  each  subject,  in 
the  order  of  their  increasing  excellence,  is  as  follows : 

Time  Errors 

M.   H.    S.   H 53'-58"  M.  H.  S.  H 644 

J.    J.    T 4o'-i4"  J.  J.  T 412 

G.  M.  F 32'-32"  E.  C.  P 285 

H.  F.  A 27'-58"  M.  R.  F 279 

M.  R   F 27'-58"  J.   W.   H 243 

J.  W.  H 22'-47"  H.  F.  A 213 

E.  C.  P 2i'-22"  G.  M.  F 179 

The  relative  predominance  of  a  single  specific  activity  involved 
in  the  learning  process  can  hardly  be  called  upon  to  explain  the 
above  lists  of  the  subjects  in  their  increasing  order  of  merit,  as 
the  summarized  data  on  these  activities  show : 

Imagery:  (a)  E.  C.  P.  employed  visual  imagery  to  the  greatest 
extent,  J.  W.  H.  ranks  next  to  her  in  this  respect,  and  M.  R.  F. 
was  a  rather  distant  third.  This  would  seem  to  suggest  correla- 
tion between  imagery  and  efficiency.  But  the  two  last  used 
visual  material  in  connection  with  other  forms,  and  H.  F.  A., 
whose  time  record  is  very  close  to  that  of  M.  R.  F.,  reports  no 
visual  imagery  at  all.  The  error  coliuiin  fails  entirely  to  suggest 
a  corresponding  relationship  between  the  use  of  visual  material 
and  success  with  the  maze,  (b)  M.  H.  S.  H.  and  H.  F.  A. 
represent  the  most  exclusive  emphasis  upon  motor  processes; 
G.  M.  F.  employed  the  same  type  of  imagery,  but  complicated 
with  verbal  material.  No  obvious  correlation  in  this  respect  is 
suggested,  (c)  It  does  not  appear  that  a  combination  of  image 
processes,  such  as  was  represented  by  M.  R.  F.,  G.  M.  F.,  and 
J.  W.  H.,  is  to  be  directly  related  with  skill  in  the  maze. 

Thinking  and  Attention:  (a)  M.  R.  F.,  who  attempted  to 
the  greatest  extent  a  rationalizing  attitude,  occupies  middle 
ground  in  the  matter  of  efficiency.  It  would  be  exceedingly 
difficult  to  determine  how  the  remaining  subjects  are  to  be 
ranked  as  to  the  amount  of  thinking  they  did.  M.  H.  S.  H.  has 
a  considerable  amount  to  her  credit,  but  it  was  concerned  with 
one  particular  segment  of  the  maze,     (b)  On  the  basis  of  the 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  31 

amount  of  attention  paid  to  the  maze,  irrespective  of  the  attempt 
at  intellectiializing,  E.  C.  P.,  J.  W.  H.,  G.  M.  F.,  and  M.  R.  F. 
might  be  Hsted  as  representing  the  maximum  amount,  with 
M.  H.  S.  H.  and  H.  F.  A.  in  an  intermediate  position  ,and  J.  J.  T. 
rather  definitely  employing  the  least.  Again,  assuming  that  this 
classification  is  adequate,  it  corresponds  to  the  order  of  merit 
column  only  in  a  general  way. 

Habit:  J.  W.  H.  and  M.  H.  S.  H.  emphasized  the  maximum 
amount  as  regards  this  factor,  and  with  them  H.  F.  A.  should 
probably  be  placed.  M.  R.  F.  and  J.  J.  T.  report  it  to  a  consider- 
able less  extent;  E.  C.  P.,  little  or  none.  A  correlation  in  this 
respect  is  again  difficult  inasmuch  as  this  factor  seemed  to  be 
detrimental  as  well  as  beneficial. 

B.     SOME  EXPERIMENTS  WITH  MODIFIED 
CONDITIONS 

At  the  conclusion  of  the  experiment  just  described,  it  was 
thought  advisable  to  supplement  the  study  with  a  series  of 
additional  tests,  designed,  (i)  to  serve  as  a  control  over  the 
data  given  by  the  experiment;  (2)  to  bring  out  if  possible  any 
new  data,  or  to  enable  us  to  emphasize  aspects  of  the  old.  The 
instructions  given  for  Experiment  I  were  followed,  subject  to 
changes  imposed  by  the  modified  conditions.  The  tests  followed 
Experiment  I  in  the  order  described. 

I.  Description  of  the  tests,  and  results 

Test  I.  The  subject  was  asked  to  go  through  a  maze,  the  exact 
duplicate  of  the  one  just  learned,  but  reduced  in  size  to  one- 
fourth  the  proportions. 

Each  subject  made  two  trials  in  this  smaller  maze.  Only  one 
of  them,  E.  C.  P.,  made  errors  in  the  first  trial.  She  made 
two,  quite  obviously  due  to  the  fact  that  her  pencil  became  caught 
in  one  of  the  passages.  A  few  errors  were  made  by  two  sub- 
jects in  the  second  trial,  all  of  which  were  accidental  in  their 
nature,  due  to  the  more  difficult  technique  as  compared  with  that 
involved  in  going  through  the  larger  maze. 

The  introspections  were  unanimous  to  the  effect  that  the  con- 


32  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

trols  were  the  same.  The  subject,  after  he  had  traversed  the 
first  passage,  formed  an  estimate  of  the  relative  lengths  of  the 
other  passages,  and  went  through  the  route  correctly,  with  the 
errors  noted.  The  various  reports  read :  "Rather  uncomfortable, 
but  decided  feeling  of  familiarity  of  the  situation — used  same 
control  I  used  for  the  regular  maze — outside  of  the  novelty  of 
the  performance,  the  same  factors  were  involved."  All  of  them 
who  reported  the  habit  factor  in  the  large  maze,  testified  that  it 
behaved  in  practically  the  same  manner  in  this  case. 

The  image  controls  were  simply  modified  to  meet  the  situation. 
E.  C.  P.  says:  "Used  same  visual  image,  reduced  in  size." 
J.  W.  H.  gives  practically  the  same  report.  G.  M.  F.  used  her 
usual  verbal  formula.  The  subjects  employing  motor  controls 
report  nothing  new.  They  were  simply  adapted  to  a  smaller 
objective  situation.  The  habit  element  was  distinctly  functional. 
The  increased  mechanical  difficulty  of  the  operation  however 
made  the  customary  reliance  upon  it  impossible. 

Practically  every  subject,  at  the  close  of  this  test,  was  positive 
that  he  would  be  able  to  walk  through  a  maze  of  the  same 
pattern,  blindfolded,  with  few  or  no  errors.  We  append  this  as 
an  indication  of  the  introspective  reaction  of  the  subject  on  the 
modified  condition. 

Test  2.  The  subject  was  required  to  go  through  the  normal 
maze  with  the  pencil  attached  to  the  wrist  instead  of  being  held 
by  the  hand.  For  this  test  the  pencil  was  firmly  attached  to  a 
splint,  which  was  bound  firmly  but  comfortably  to  the  wrist  and 
fore-arm  by  surgeon's  bandage.  He  was  then  asked  to  go  through 
the  reduced  maze,  used  in  test  i,  with  the  pencil  held  in  the  hand, 
using  finger  and  wrist  movement  only,  the  arm  being  held  sta- 
tionary on  a  support  provided.  This  second  part  of  the  test  re- 
quired one  shift  of  the  arm,  after  the  middle  of  the  maze  had 
been  reached. 

The  idea  in  this  test  was  to  eliminate,  in  the  first  part  of  it,  the 
kinaesthetic  and  tactual  factors  from  the  arm  and  finders :  in 
the  second  part,  to  cut  out  the  same  elements  from  the  arm,  as 
far  as  possible.  Since  test  i  had  shown  the  same  controls  to  be 
operative  in  the  smaller  maze  as  in  the  larger,  we  felt  justified 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  33 

in  employing  it  for  the  second  part  of  test  2,  inasmuch  as  the 
task  of  going  through  the  larger  maze  under  the  same  condi- 
tions would  have  necessitated  some  half-dozen  or  more  arm 
shifts. 

About  half  the  subjects  made  from  1-4  errors  in  the  test  with 
the  wrist  attachment.  In  order  of  importance,  the  causes  as- 
signed by  the  subjects  were:  (a)  distraction  of  the  attention 
by  the  technique  of  the  test,  (b)  actual  physical  difficulty,  (c) 
orientation :  this  was  more  difficult  under  these  conditions,  as  the 
tactual  cues  which  ordinarily  told  the  subject  his  location  were 
"blunted."  They  employed  the  projected  tactual  sensibility  as 
best  they  could.  J.  W.  H.  reported  that  the  tactual  feeling- 
was  transferred,  not  eliminated. 

Fewer  errors  were  made  when  the  smaller  maze  was  run  by 
hand  movement  only.  The  main  difficulty  reported  was  the  sheer 
physical  one. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  while  the  subjects  in  Experiment  I  con- 
sistently emphasized  the  arm  sensation  factor  more  than  the  hand, 
more  trouble  was  experienced  in  the  test  in  which  hand  and  finger, 
sensations  were  approximately  dispensed  with,  than  in  the  hand 
movement  test.  In  either  case,  however,  the  main  emphasis  was 
upon  the  mechanical  difficulty  of  the  process.  The  subjects  were 
sure  they  did  not,  in  the  first  part  of  the  test,  elicit  hand  and 
finger  sensations  from  the  hand,  by  incipient  movements,  and 
then  transfer  them.  They  simply  utilized  the  sensations  from  the 
wrist  instead.  In  a  similar  way,  they  did  not  evoke  arm  sensa- 
tions or  images  in  the  second  part  of  the  experiment  and  substi- 
tute them  for  the  same  sensation  normally  called  out  by  the 
actual  use  of  the  arm,  but  they  transferred  their  attention  to  the 
fingers  and  hand,  and  utilized  the  sensations  coming  from  them. 

Test  3.  In  this  test  the  larger  maze  was  used,  and  the  condi- 
tions were  the  same,  except  that  the  subjects  were  asked  to  use 
the  left  hand  instead  of  the  right,  which  was  used  by  all  learners 
in  Experiment  I. 

All  the  subjects  reported  the  process  difficult  because  awkward, 
but  all  of  them  reported  the  some  controls  used.  J.  W.  H.,  who 
is  extremely  right  handed,   reported  an  actual  transference  of 


34  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

kinaesthetic  imagery  from  the  right  hand  and  arm  to  the  left. 
M.  R.  F.  reports  it  "A  transference,  not  a  new  learning  process. 
It  seemed  queer,  like  the  small  maze."  E.  C.  P.  ran  up  i6 
errors  with  the  left  hand  in  the  first  trial.  She  ascribed  it  how- 
ever to  sheer  awkwardness,  "the  difficulty  of  doing  anything 
with  the  left  hand."  She  made  no  errors  in  the  second  trial. 
M.  H.  S.  H.,  who  depended  so  exclusively  upon  kinaesthetic  cues 
and  imagery,  reported  the  process  the  same;  it  was  essentially 
a  transference.  In  all  cases,  the  transference  was  made  without 
special  effort. 

Test  4.  Preliminary  to  this,  and  to  all  succeeding  tests,  the 
subject  first  went  through  the  maze,  normal  running,  in  ordei* 
to  keep  conditions  as  nearly  as  possible  the  same  as  they  were  at 
the  completion  of  Experiment  i. 

In  test  4  the  subject  was  seated  in  front  of  the  standard  maze, 
the  usual  conditions  being  observed.  Instead  of  allowing  him  to 
begin  at  the  starting  box,  however,  the  experimenter  placed  the 
pencil,  upon  which  the  subject  retained  his  hold,  in  various  places 
in  the  maze,  both  (a)  in  the  true  path,  and  (b)  in  cul-de-sacs. 
The  subject  was  asked  to  proceed  from  these  places  to  the  exit, 
under  the  condition  of  a  normal  trial  in  the  maze.  At  least  50 
different  tests  were  made  for  each  subject,  ten  or  a  dozen  being 
made  at  each  sitting.  The  order  was  made  as  irregular  as  possi- 
ble, to  obviate  any  attempt  of  the  subject  to  guess  where  his  next 
place  of  starting  would  be. 

The  results  from  the  subjects  in  this  test  were  strikingly  uni- 
form. In  every  case,  without  any  suggestions  on  the  part  of  the 
experimenter,  and  without  communication  between  the  subjects, 
they  made  a  definite  judgment,  after  being  placed  in  the  maze, 
and  before  they  started  for  the  exit,  as  to  their  location.  After 
this  tendency  was  observed  by  the  experim'enter,  they  were 
asked  to  make  their  judgments  aloud.  The  judgments  were  in 
every  case  based  upon  the  cues  furnished  by  the  muscular  and 
strain  sensations  from  the  arm. 

In  every  case  the  success  of  the  subject  in  going  from  the  place 
of  starting  to  the  exit  with  a  minimum  of  errors  seemed  almost 
directly  proportionate  to  the  accuracy  of  the  judgment.    In  many 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  35 

cases  he  made  more  errors  when  placed  in  the  true  path  than 
when  set  down  in  cul-de-sacs — this,  too,  in  view  of  the  fact 
that  no  subject  at  this  time  could  describe  all  of  the  cul-de-sacs, 
while  all  of  them  had  a  rather  definite  knowledge  of  the  true 
path.  In  one  trial  that  resulted  in  15  errors,  M.  R.  F.  was  set 
down  just  before  the  end  of  B,  but  made  the  judgment  that 
she  was  at  the  beginning  of  G.  She  started  left,  was  stopped 
after  a  short  distance,  turned  up,  and  was  stopped  again.  So  far 
her  experience  fully  substantiated  her  judgment.  But  when  she 
attempted  to  turn  left  again  (thinking  she  was  on  H),  she  found 
herself  blocked.  She  reported  a  sudden  and  intense  sense  of 
absolute  confusion,  a  realization  that  she  was  hopelessly  lost : 
"If  I'm  not  here,  I  haven't  the  slightest  idea  zvhere  I  am." 

This  is  a  very  characteristic  description  of  the  reaction  that 
Test  4  elicited.  If  the  judgment  were  inaccurate,  the  process 
was  one  of  a  trial  and  error  moving  around,  trying  to  fit  one  idea 
after  another  to  the  cues  furnished  by  the  experience.  Recog- 
nition or  orientation  might  come  after  one  or  two  turns,  or  might 
not  come  until  after  prolonged  exploration. 

As  the  tests  were  continued,  all  the  subjects  increased  in  their 
ability  to  form  more  accurate  judgments.  It  was  practically 
impossible  for  the  experimenter  to  compare  the  relative  ability 
of  the  different  subjects,  either  at  the  beginning  or  at  the  close 
of  this  test,  on  account  of  the  fluctuations,  which  were  rather 
extreme. 

Test  5.  In  this  test  the  normal  maze  was  used  with  the  follow- 
ing modifications : 

(i)  The  subject,  after  being  blindfolded,  was  walked  around 
the  room  in  various  directions  before  being  seated. 

(2)  The  chair,  table,  and  maze,  were  rotated  at  various  angles, 
45°'  90°'  180°,  etc.,  from  their  original  position,  in  an  irregular 
order,  while  their  relative  positions  remained  unaltered.  The 
subject  was  then  seated  directly,  and  asked  to  go  through  the 
maze  as  usual. 

(3)  The  chair  was  placed  in  different  positions  facing  the  maze, 
which,  with  the  table,  remained  unaltered. 

(4)  The  chair  and  table  remained  in  their  normal  position, 


36  F.A.  C.  PERRIN 

but  the  maze  itself  was  rotated,  clock-wise  and  counter-clockwise, 
at  all  practicable  angles. 

(5)  By  means  of  a  special  apparatus,  the  maze  was  made  to 
rotate,  in  either  direction,  zvhile  the  subject  was  attempting  to 
trace  through  it  with  the  pencil.  In  all  the  other  conditions  fol- 
lowed in  this  test,  no  part  of  the  apparatus  was  changed  after 
the  subject  actually  began  the  trial.  In  part  (4),  the  maze 
rested  upon  a  wood  base  instead  of  upon  the  plate  glass,  on  the 
bottom  of  which  three  wheels  were  attached.  These  rested  upon 
a  circular  track  of  wire  laid  upon  another  wood  base,  so  that 
maze  and  upper  base  could  be  rotated  in  either  direction,  at  any 
speed,  by  the  hand  of  the  experimenter.  The  apparatus  worked 
smoothly,  and  was  practicall}^  noiseless. 

In  general,  very  little  disturbance  resulted  from  the  modifica- 
tions imposed  in  the  first  four  series  of  test  5.  For  (i)  and  (2) 
the  subjects  were  unanimous  in  reporting  that  they  were  not  in 
the  least  disturbed,  that  positive  orientation  did  not  bother  them. 
All  of  them  had  previously  been  aware  in  what  direction  the  chair 
faced.  No  amount  of  turning  them  around,  in  (i),  enabled 
the  experimenter  to  disturb  their  sense  of  position.  No  errors  or 
increase  of  time  resulted  from  (i)  and  (2). 

The  introspections  from  (3)  and  (4)  were  similar.  The  image 
controls  were  simply  adapted  to  the  new  situation.  The  process, 
on  the  part  of  J.  W.  H.,  seemed  to  accentuate  his  imagery. 
E.  C.  P.  said  that  her  visual  image  was  "turned  around"  to  meet 
the  new  situation.  With  subjects  who  had  emphasized  kinaes- 
thetic  and  tactual  factors,  the  new  conditions  called  out  nothing 
new  in  these  processes,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  for  any 
turn  or  path  of  the  maze,  an  actual  different  set  of  muscles  might 
be  involved  from  those  used  normally.  There  was  with  all  a 
consciousness  of  a  new  arm  position,  and  a  consequent  feeling 
of  awkwardness,  but  the  process,  in  this  as  in  Experiment  I, 
was  one  of  controlling  a  certain  sequence  of  turns.  The  kinaes- 
thesis  was  built  up  in  terms  of  this  sequence.  For  tests  (3)  and 
(4)  we  recorded  a  few  errors  that  were  ascribed  to  general  dis- 
traction of  attention. 

The  rotating  maze  was,  in  the  following  order,    (a)    turned 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  37 

slowly,  at  a  uniform  rate,  in  one  direction,  without  any  instruc- 
tions being  previously  given  to  the  subject;  (b)  rotated  faster, 
at  the  rate  of  about  one  revolution  per  10  seconds  (the  average 
time  it  took  the  subject  to  go  from  entrance  to  exit  under  normal 
conditions)  in  either  direction,  but  constant  for  each  trial,  untir 
the  exit  was  reached;  (c)  rotated,  during  any  one  trial,  in  either 
direction,  with  frequent  and  variable  changes  of  speed  and 
direction. 

The  observation  of  the  behavior  of  the  subject  when  he  first 
tried  the  rotating  maze  proved  to  be  extremely  interesting.  The 
maze  was  moved  very  slowly.  The  subject  covered  about  one- 
fourth  of  the  path  before  he  realized  that  something  was  wrong. 
Most  of  them  became  vaguely  aware  that  something  was  unusual, 
and  thought  that  the  angles  were  being  altered.  Very  few  errors 
were  made,  however,  during  this  trial. 

In  the  series  in  which  the  maze  was  rotated  slowly  in  one  di- 
rection and  at  a  uniform  speed,  the  introspections  were  very 
similar  to  those  given  in  (3)  and  (4)  of  this  test.  The  subject 
first  got  the  cue  of  the  direction  and  speed  of  rotation  from  the 
sensations  of  the  arm  as  he  traversed  the  path  A-B.  He  then 
tried  to  gauge  his  movements  in  terms  of  the  new  conditions. 
The  visualizers  testified  that  their  visual  image  "rotated."  keep- 
ing pace,  and  checked  up  by,  the  maze  itself.  They  modified  this 
statement  to  the  effect  that  they  visualized  the  pattern  in  a  num- 
ber of  successive  positions,  which  followed  in  general  the  rota- 
tion of  the  maze.  Those  employing  other  controls  reported 
nothing  not  given  in  (2)  and  (3).  All  of  them  proceeded 
slowly  and  cautiously  and  very  few  errors  were  made. 

In  the  last  part  of  this  test,  in  which  the  maze  was  rotated  with 
all  possible  variations  in  change  of  speed  and  direction,  the  task 
of  tracing  through  it  proved  to  be  either  extremely  difficult  or 
flatly  impossible.  The  subject  could  not  get  adequate  cues  as 
to  the  changes  that  were  being  made,  or  if  he  could,  he  was  not 
able  to  control  his  movements  quickly  enough  to  get  a  new  orien- 
tation before  a  new  change  was  made.  He  was  able  to  keep  in 
mind  rather  clearly  what  path  he  had  reached,  but  he  was  not 
able  to  proceed  from  there.     If,  e.g.,  he  had  reached  the  middle 


38  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

of  L,  a  few  rapid  turns  would  suffice  to  confuse  his  sense  of 
direction,  and  he  would  not  continue  from  sheer  inability  to 
tell  whether  he  was  headed  for  K  or  M. 

Test  6.  In  this  test  the  subjects  were  started  at  the  exit,  and 
instructed  to  proceed  to  the  entrance.  Otherwise,  the  conditions 
were  the  same  as  for  Experiment  I. 

The  task  was  not  found  difficult.  Two  subjects  made  errors 
the  first  trial,  but  corrected  them  easily.  There  was  the  ten- 
dency in  evidence  that  characterized  all  the  tests  to  accentuate 
the  imagery  employed.  The  introspections  were  in  most  cases 
practically  a  description  of  the  objective  behavior :  they  simply 
followed  the  path  backwards.  The  motor  subjects  relied  a  little 
more  on  prompting  by  verbal  cues,  but  the  same  kind  of  antici- 
patory motor  imagery  was  reported.  The  habit  factor  was  at  a 
minimum  for  all  the  subjects,  but  after  the  test  had  been  repeated 
several  times  it  began  to  make  its  appearance  at  a  relatively  earlier 
stage  than  it  did  in  the  first  experiment.  In  general,  the  trip 
was  made  by  each  subject  reversing  the  various  steps  in  his 
idea  of  the  sequence  of  turns,  in  terms  of  the  imagery  he  em- 
ployed for  every  test.  The  usual  kinaesthetic  and  tactual  sensa- 
tional cues  were  attended  to  for  the  purpose  of  checking  up  the 
control  idea. 

Test  7.  The  maze  was  turned  upper  surface  down,  and 
clamped  to  the  plate  glass  as  usual.  Since  the  grooves  were  cut 
through  the  board,  this  reversal  resulted  in  the  "mirror"  maze. 
The  subject  was  told  of  the  alteration  before  he  made  the  trials. 

Most  of  the  subjects  expressed  surprise  that  the  first  trial  did 
not  prove  more  difficult.  Some  found  it  as  easy  as  the  backward 
running.  The  same  introspections  were  given :  an  adaptation  of 
the  usual  control  imagery  to  the  new  situation,  as  checked  up 
by  the  experience  of  actually  going  through  the  path  and  attend- 
ing to  the  sensory  recognition  element.  M.  R.  F.  who  used  some 
visual  imagery  in  test  6,  as  she  had  in  Experiment  I,  reported 
herself  as  unable  to  visualize  segments  of  the  mirror  maze,  and 
consequently  she  relied  on  verbal  and  kinaesthetic  cues.  She 
found  the  process  no  more  difficult  however  than  that  involved 
in  test  6.     J.  W.   H.   and  E.   C.   P.   reconstructed  their  visual 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  39 

images,  making  them  "mirror"  in  form,  to  suit  the  condition. 
They  reported  them  just  as  vivid  as  ever,  equally  stable,  equally 
adequate  for  the  purpose  they  served.  The  objective  records 
for  tests  6  and  7  were  strikingly  similar. 

Test  8.  This  was  in  reality  an  elaborate  series  of  tests  de- 
signed as  objective  checks  on  imagery.  The  subjects  were  re- 
quired to  read  aloud,  to  repeat  different  jingles  in  terms  of 
auditory  imagery,  to  follow  a  visual  diagram  perceptually,  to 
following  a  moving  light  with  the  eyes,  while  tracing  through 
the  maze.  They  were  given  various  tasks  to  do  with  the  left 
hand  while  using  the  right  in  going  through  the  path.  Tests 
to  eliminate  and  to  control  eye  movement  were  introduced. 

Our  tests  elicited  the  results  characteristic  of  many  tests  for 
imagery :  they  practically  amounted  to  general  distraction  tests. 
The  tests  were  continued  in  the  hope  that  even  if  they  were  of 
this  nature,  certain  relative  results  would  be  obtained  that  would 
bring  out  the  desired  factors.  That  is,  it  was  assumed  that  if  any 
one  of  the  tests  were  continued  indefinitely,  it  would  prove  to 
be  relatively  more  of  a  distraction  test  for  the  imagery  aimed  at 
than  it  would  be  for  other  forms  of  image  processes.  We  were 
disappointed  in  this  respect. 

The  results  from  the  auditory-verbal  tests,  in  the  case  of 
G.  M.  F.,  were  relatively  satisfactory.  This  subject  was  made  to 
go  through  a  maze  for  a  number  of  trials,  at  the  same  time 
repeating  "Mary  had  a  little  lamb,"  continuously  to  herself.  She 
testified  that  it  interfered  seriously  with  her  verbal  formula. 
She  was  forced  to  "slip  in"  her  verbal  directions,  between  the 
words  of  the  verse  she  was  asked  to  repeat.  The  result  was  no 
errors,  but  a  perceptible  increase  in  time. 

The  visual  distraction  tests  were  productive  of  no  positive 
results.  They  simply  interfered  with  the  attention  involved 
in  going  through  the  maze.  With  E.  C.  P.  the  verbal  distrac- 
tion tests  disturbed  her  visual  imagery  fully  as  much  as  did  the 
visual  tests. 

Certainly,  however,  these  tests  offered  no  possible  basis  for 
challenging  the  introspections  of  any  subject  on  the  matter  of 
imagery. 


40  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

In  connection  with  this  series,  three  small  and  comparatively 
simple  mazes  were  learned  by  each  of  the  subjects  by  three  respec- 
tive methods  of  presentation  of  the  true  paths,  (i)  For  the 
first  maze  the  subject  was  required  to  memorize  before  starting 
a  verbal  set  of  directions  which  were  typewritten  and  handed 
to  him.  They  included  directions  for  the  true  path,  not  for 
the  cul-de-sacs,  and  began  as  follows:  "^  inch  up — 4  inches 
to  right — 4^  inches  to  left — i  inch  down,"  etc.  The  sub- 
ject was  required  to  memorize  this  accurately  before  he  was 
allowed  to  start  in  the  maze  itself.  (2)  In  the  second  case,  the 
subject  studied  a  visual  pattern  of  the  true  path,  from  which 
the  cul-de-sacs  were  omitted,  drawn  on  paper,  of  the  exact  size 
of  the  path  itself.  (3)  For  this  presentation,  the  blindfolded 
subject  traced  through  the  maze  to  be  run  with  entrances  to  all 
cul-de-sacs  blocked. 

The  subject  was  asked  to  retain  his  hold  on  the  maze  in  terms 
of  the  imagery  used  in  the  presentation  of  the  path.  He  was  not 
allowed  a  trial  until  he  had  satisfied  the  experimenter  that  he 
knew  the  path  he  was  about  to  trace. 

No  subject  was  able  to  comply  with  the  instructions  as  to  the 
manner  in  which  the  path  was  to  be  retained  in  memory. 
E.  C.  P.  studied  the  visual  pattern  as  drawn  and  remembered 
it  in  the  appropriate  imagery.  She  also  succeded  in  committing 
to  memory  the  verbal  formula  in  verbal  terms,  but  was  unable 
to  refrain  from  translating  this  into  a  visual  image  when  started 
in  the  maze.  G.  M.  F.  and  M.  H.  S.  H.  were  unable  to  remember 
the  visual  drawing  as  a  visual  image,  but  reinforced  the  scant 
image  they  got  by  verbal  comment  and  kinaesthetic  aids,  before 
they  attempted  the  maze  itself.  These  three  tests  convinced  the 
subjects  that  they  had  not  been  in  error  in  their  respective  reports 
as  to  the  imagery  they  normally  employed.  As  for  the  objec- 
tive results,  the  learning  of  the  verbal  set  of  directions  proved 
to  be  by  far  the  most  difficult  and  irksome  task  they  were  asked 
to  do.  The  learning  by  visual  presentation  was  much  easier  for 
all,  the  learning  by  actually  traversing  the  maze  was  accomplished 
with  the  greatest  facility  by  all.  There  was  little  or  no  evidence 
of  any  correlation  between  the  method  of  presentation  and  the 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  41 

image  technique  of  the  respective  subjects  as  to  relative  ease 
in  learning. 

2.     Significance  of  the  results  obtained  from  tests 

The  data  briefly  given  represent  a  summary  of  the  evidence 
contributed  by  the  tests.  It  substantiates  the  introspective  testi- 
mony to  the  effect  that  the  control  of  the  maze  learning  process 
was  largely  an  ideational  matter.  The  significant  thing,  for  in- 
stance, as  brought  out  in  the  "mirror"  test,  was  the  ability  of  the 
subject  to  adapt  his  visual  or  other  image,  to  manipulate  it,  rather 
than  the  fact  that  his  idea  was  expressed  in  certain  structural 
terms.  Little  evidence  offered  itself  to  indicate  that  the  indi- 
vidual mental  processes  of  any  subject  were  relatively  more  ade- 
quate for  some  of  the  conditions  than  for  others. 

C.    EXPERIMENT  II 

While  the  present  investigation  was  concerned  primarily  with 
the  activities  of  the  human  subject  in  the  pencil  maze,  as  a  study 
of  a  definite  learning  process,  it  was  thought  desirable  to  intro- 
duce into  the  experimental  work  a  maze  through  which  the  sub- 
ject actually  walked.  The  object  was  to  determine  whether  or 
not  different  learning  processes  were  involved  in  the  two  mazes 
calling  for  different  kinds  of  physical  technique.  In  other  re- 
spects, the  conditions  were  kept  the  same.  The  subject  was 
blindfolded,  was  given  practically  the  same  directions  used  before. 

I.     Description  of  maze,  and  method 

(a)  The  mace:  The  experimenter  was  saved  the  immense 
amount  of  time  and  labor  necessarily  involved  in  the  construction 
of  such  a  maze  by  the  offer  of  one  admirably  adapted  for  the 
purpose  of  the  experiment  located  in  Forest  Park,  Chicago.  This 
is  one  of  the  amusement  parks  of  the  city,  and  the  maze,  called  the 
"Mouse-trap,"  had  been  used  as  a  pleasure  devise  for  several 
years.     None  of  our  subjects  had  seen  it  or  heard  of  it. 

A  diagram  of  this  maze  [Fig.  4]  is  given  on  the  opposite 
page.  It  was  duodecagonal  in  shape,  with  the  various  paths 
arranged  in  concentric  fashion,  leading  to  the  exit  in  the  centre. 


42 


F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 


From  the  exit  the  subject  ascended  a  circular  stairway,  and  by- 
means  of  a  boardwalk  on  top  of  the  maze,  extending  from  the 
center  on  one  of  the  radii  and  leading  to  a  stairway  outside  the 
maze,  he  descended,  thus  obviating  the  necessity  of  returning 
throusfh  the  maze. 


J)e$cencl'm5 

(Stair  2X/      Entrance 
I 

Figure  4.     The  "Mouse-trap." 

The  "Mouse-trap"  was  constructed  of  sections  made  of  wire 
netting,  bordered  and  held  together  by  angle-iron.  The  wire 
was  of  uniform  size,  about  a  12-gauge,  woven  into  a  diagonal 
lYz  inch  mesh.  The  maze  rested  upon  an  even  wood  floor, 
elevated  about  6  inches  from  the  ground.  There  were  as  many 
sections,  in  any  one  partition,  or  in  the  outside  wall,  as  there  were 
sides  of  the  duodecagon  around  which  the  partitions  extended.. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  43 

The  maze  was  covered  by  the  wire  netting,  divided  into  12  sec- 
tions, each  section  corresponding  to  a  sector  of  the  top.  From 
floor  to  top  the  height  was  7  feet;  each  alley  was  of  uniform 
width,  2  feet  4  inches.  The  length  of  the  sections  making  up 
the  outside  wall  was  12  feet  2  inches,  so  that  the  circumference 
of  the  maze  measured  146  feet.  The  exit  box  in  the  center,  from 
which  the  stairway  ascended,  had  a  diameter  of  9  feet  4  inches. 
All  openings  or  doors  were  of  the  same  width  as  the  alleys.  Two 
box-like  areas  were  located,  as  is  seen  in  the  diagram,  in  section 
I  of  the  maze.  One  of  these,  which  is  referred  to  as  Box  i,  was 
8  feet  in  width,  gYs  feet  in  depth;  the  second  enclosure.  Box  2> 
was  of  the  same  width,  and  was  4  feet  8  inches  in  depth. 

The  maze  was  in  the  open,  and  side  i,  on  which  was  the 
entrance,  faced  the  north.    The  floor  was  perfectly  level. 

(b)  Method  of  conducting  the  experiment :  The  subject,  after 
entering  the  park,  was  led  directly  to  a  small  building  about  60 
feet  northeast  of  the  maze,  conveniently  situated  so  that  he  did 
not  see  any  part  of  it.  There  he  was  blindfolded  as  in  Experi- 
ment I,  and  led  to  the  entrance.  He  stepped  upon  the  platform, 
rested  his  two  hands  on  the  two  sides  of  the  entrance  door,  and 
waited  until  the  experimenter  mounted  the  overhead  walk  and 
gave  the  signal,  "start." 

The  directions  and  instructions  given  in  the  preceding  experi- 
ment were  modified  to  the  following  extent :  The  subject  is 
permitted  to  use  both  hands  as  he  wishes,  getting  with  them  all 
the  tactual  cues  possible.  (This  allowed  him  to  feel  the  floor  if 
he  so  desired,  but  only  one  subject  resorted  to  this,  in  one  trial, 
and  he  soon  gave  it  up  as  useless.)  He  was  permitted  to  walk 
forward  or  backwards,  run,  or  carry  himself  in  general  as  he 
saw  fit.  The  maze  was  considered  learned  when  the  subject 
had  gone  by  the  shortest  route  from  entrance  to  exit  three  times 
in  succession  without  error.  The  mention  of  more  than  one 
possible  path  was  made  for  this  experiment  in  the  same  manner 
that  it  was  in  the  previous  one.  In  this  case,  however,  there 
was  an  actual  option  of  paths. 

The  experimenter  stood  quietly  upon  the  platform  and  wrote 
down,  in  addition  to  the  time,  a  literal  account  of  the  route  each 


44  F.  A.  C.  P  ERR  IN 

subject  followed  for  each  trial.  This  was  not  an  especially  diffi- 
cult task,  as  the  actual  time  involved  in  walking  gave  the  observer 
ample  opportunity  to  take  complete  notes  of  everything  he  de- 
sired to  record.  The  experimenter  was  careful,  except  in  one  or 
two  exigencies,  to  say  nothing  to  the  subject,  who,  however,  was 
encouraged  to  express  his  introspections  or  comments  aloud, 
to  any  extent  which  did  not  act  as  a  distraction.  The  subject 
was  told  absolutely  nothing  of  the  plan  or  construction  of  the 
"Mouse-trap."  It  was  simply  "a  maze,"  which  he  was  to  learn 
by  walking  through  it.  When  the  learner  reached  the  exit  box 
at  the  end  of  the  first  trial,  he  was  told  to  "stop."  In  the  ensuing 
trials,  he  had  no  difficulty  in  recognizing  it.  He  was  led,  still 
blindfolded,  over  the  walk,  down  to  the  ground,  and  back  to  the 
building  mentioned,  where  the  bandage  was  removed  and  the 
introspections  were  called  for. 

Owing  to  the  distance  of  Forest  Park  from  the  psychological 
laboratory,  it  was  practically  necessary  for  the  subject  to  make 
the  trials  in  succession,  with  intervals  of  10-15  minutes  for  rest 
and  introspections.  Each  subject  spent  a  good  half  day  at  the 
performance ;  two  of  them  made  two  trips  before  they  learned  the 
maze.  The  experiment  was  conducted  in  October,  191 1,  and  the 
following  were  induced  to  act  as  subjects:  J.  R.  A.,  M.  R.  F., 
W.  S.  H.,  E.  W.  B.,  R.  B.  O. 

2.     The  objective  behavior  of  the  subjects  in  the  maze, 

AND  the  nature  OF  THE  LEARNING  PROCESS 

(a)  General  description  of  behavior:  There  were  very  few 
individual  differences  to  be  noticed  in  the  behavior  of  the  sub- 
jects. They  proceeded  very  cautiously,  especially  for  the  first 
few  trials.  Both  hands  were  employed  in  feeling  the  sides  of 
the  alley  ahead  for  the  openings.  Several  times  during  the  first 
or  second  trial  the  subjects  became  so  engrossed  in  the  search  for 
openings  that  they  ignored  the  possibility  of  blind  endings  in 
the  path,  and  a  few  unlooked  for  bodily  contacts  with  the  ends 
of  blind  passages  resulted.  This  happened  a  few  times  in  the 
later  trials,  as  the  result  of  over-confidence  in  their  ability  to 
guage  the  lengths  of  various  passages.    As  they  learned  the  path, 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  45 

the  speed  was  increased  in  familiar  regions  from  a  blind  man's 
walk  to  a  brisk  half-walk  and  half-trot.  Most  of  the  learners, 
when  they  had  reached  openings,  would  stop  for  the  purpose  of 
studying  or  attempting  to  remember  their  location.  When  either 
of  the  two  boxes  were  entered,  the  subject  would  as  a  rule  keep 
one  hand  in  contact  with  the  side,  for  the  purpose  of  retaining 
his  orientation,  and  reach  as  far  out  as  possible  with  the  other. 
No  subject  attempted  walking  backwards,  or  any  other  pro- 
nounced variation  from  the  regular  procedure.  They  would  occa- 
sionally stop  and  face  in  different  directions,  in  an  attempt  to 
get  a  better  orientation. 

One  subject,  J.  R.  A.,  in  the  absence  of  directions  to  the  con- 
trary, wore  gloves  in  practically  every  trial.  Several  of  the  sub- 
jects at  different  times  availed  themselves  of  this  protection  from 
the  metal.  As  will  be  mentioned  below,  this  did  not  interfere 
with  the  tactual  discrimination  employed. 

(6)  Nature  of  the  learning  method:  The  variation  in  method 
in  evidence  in  the  pencil  maze  was  not  so  pronounced  in  this 
experiment.  The  introspections  were  more  similar  to  those  of 
M.  R.  F.  in  the  normal  maze.  They  indicate  a  more  persistent 
attempt  at  studying  out  situations.  No  subject  reported  com- 
plete reliance  on  the  hit-or-miss  method  of  H.  F.  A.  The  fact 
that  the  subject  had  more  time  to  think  or  plan  in  the  "Mouse- 
trap" partly  acounts  for  this,  and  the  reports  indicate  that  the 
greater  complexity  of  the  maze  itself  called  for  more  intensive 
study.  There  was  however  a  rather  sharp  fluctuation  between 
periods  of  study  and  directed  exploration  and  periods  of  aimless 
trial  and  error  with  four  of  the  five  subjects  in  the  first  trial. 

{c)  A  report  by  trials  of  the  learning  behavior  of  one  of  the 
subjects,  and  a  brief  description  of  the  learning  of  the  others: 
In  the  following  account,  references  to  segments  of  the  maze 
are  abbreviated  as  much  as  possible.  Thus,  2-2,  refers  to  the 
general  segment  corresponding  to  the  first  three  sectors  of  the 
maze  to  the  left  of  the  entrance,  while  2-4  on  B  indicates  one 
path  in  that  segment.  The  designations  given  in  the  drawing  of 
the  maze  are  followed  in  this  description.  The  record  of  R.  B.  O. 
was  selected  as  the  one  best  suited  to  give  the  reader  an  adequate 


46 


F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 


description  of  the  type  of  learning  activity  elicited  in  the  "Mous- 
trap,  because  this  subject  had  the  most  difficulty  with  the  maze, 
and  the  steps  in  his  learning  were  more  elaborated.  The  reports 
of  the  other  subjects  had  implied  in  them  the  same  activities 
found  here. 

(i)  Subject  R.  B.  O. :  Trial  (I).  This  subject  occupied  i 
hour,  15^  and  47''  in  finding  the  exit  to  the  "Mouse-trap,"  and 
at  the  sacrifice  of  112  errors,  in  his  first  trial.  His  exploration 
was  divided  up  as  follows:  (a)  In  the  first  attempt  he  turned 
right  and  entered  11-12,  which,  with  the  2-4  section  through 
Box  I,  he  went  through  several  times,     (b)  He  started  left  from 

the     entrance     and     ex- 
plored   section    5-10    at 
length,  but  worked  back 
...  to    the    entrance    before 

^  getting    further    on    the 

true  path  than  E.  (c) 
The  third  attempt  was 
largely  a  repetition  of 
(a),  (d)  Again  he  fol- 
lowed A  around  to  10, 
failed  to  find  the  exit, 
and  ended  up  in  Box  i. 

„  „       .      ,     ^  ^  ^        ,    r  ^       This  was  followed  by  a 

Figure  5.    Drawing  by  R.  B.  O.,  end  of  first  1  ,  i.         1  x 

trial.  Figures  S-io  are  exact  reproductions  of  Prolonged  entanglement 
drawings  made  by  the  subjects.  in    sections    2-4    and    II- 

12,  during  which  Box  i  was  entered  several  times,  (e)  The  exit 
was  finally  gained  in  a  last  effort  in  which  the  whole  region  5-10 
was  worked  over  in  detail. 

The  report,  like  the  behavior,  followed  M.  R.  F.  in  her  first 
trial.  He  successively  alternated  between  trying  to  keep  his  bear- 
ings as  he  went,  and  giving  himself  up  in  an  aimless  fashion 
to  whatever  he  chanced  to  find.  This  variation  of  working 
methods  did  not  carry  with  it  any  perceptible  change  in  objective 
behavior,  but  the  subject  kept  the  experimenter  informed  of  his 
fluctuations  by  such  comments  as :  "Now  I'm  not  going  to  think 
for  a  while,"  and  "Guess  I'll  study  this  region."  Like  M.  R.  F., 
his  knowledge  of  the  maze  acquired  as  the  result  of  the  first' 
trial  was  vague  and  confused.  [See  Figure  5.]  Like  J.  R.  A., 
referred  to  later,  he  had  conceived  the  exit  to  be  on  the  outside 
and  was  controlled  largely  by  the  general  idea  of  working  in  that 
direction. 

Trial  (II).     In  his  second  trial,  the  subject  again  started  to 


tntranct 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION 


47 


'  rEntranct 

Figure  6.     End  of  trial  2. 


the  left,  came  out  through  Box  i  to  A,  which  he  followed  to  10. 

He  called  A  a  circle.    He  became  confused  by  the  doors  x  and  y, 

and  found  himself  back  at  the 
entrance.  A  second  attempt 
was  largely  a  repetition  of  the 
first,  but  resulted  eventually  in 
his  gaining  the  exit.  Time 
i7''-24'',  errors  31. 

The  main  idea  the  subject 
got  from  this  trial  was  the 
circular  nature  of  the  paths,  in- 
dicated in  his  drawing.  [Figure 
6.]  Several  places  were  recog- 
nized as  familiar.  He  was  very 
much  bothered  by  the  two  doors 

X  and  y,  and  could  not  figure  out  what  connections  they  made. 
Trial  (HI).     After  going  through  the  region  11-12,  through 

Box  I,  and  gaining  the  entrance  by  way  of  a,  the  subject  gave 

the  information  aloud  that  he  had  learned  something:     "If, you 

go  straight  across  the  Box  (i.e., 
along  B)  you  come  out  at  the 
entrance.  Therefore  avoid  that 
path."  In  the  obvious  attempt 
to  profit  by  this  discovery, 
R.  B.  O.  after  entering  the  Box 
again  by  his  circuitous  route, 
searched  around  for  other  exits. 
This  led  him  into  D,  and  the  re- 
gion 2-4  was  thoroughly  ex- 
plored in  an  attempt  to  find  the 
circular  path.  This  process 
was  repeated,  until  in  despera- 
tion he  decided  to  retrace  from 
the  Box  to  the  entrance,  and 
then  go  where  "instinct"  would 
guide  him.  As  a  result  of  this 
retracing,  he  got  started  on  A, 
entrance  to   10,   and  finallv  made 


ourn 


Entrance 


Figure  7.    End  of  trial  3. 


followed  it  around  past  the 
the  exit. 

R.  B.  O.  describes  this  trial  as  "pretty  much  hit  or  miss."  He 
doubts  if  it  added  to  his  knowledge  of  the  path — he  rather  thought 
he  knew  less  tlian  at  the  end  trial  (II).     [See  Figiu'e  7.] 

Trial  (IV).  The  subject  did  not  learn  from  the  last  trial's 
experience  that  he  should  start  directly  to  the  left.     Accordingly 


48  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

he  started  on  ii-io  and  found  himself  as  usual  in  the  Box.  As 
a  result  of  a  considerable  amount  of  exploring  in  2-4,  he  decided 
on  door  d  as  the  correct  way  out  of  the  open  space.  In  an  at- 
tempt to  act  on  that  conclusion,  the  subject  repeatedly  walked 
back  and  forth  in  C  D  E  F,  in  the  region  2-4.  After  this  explora- 
tion he  concluded  that  B  after  all  was  the  correct  way  to  escape 
from  the  Box,  and  after  more  experimentation  he  discovered 
that  h  and  a  led  him  from  the  Box  to  the  circular  path.  Once  in 
the  region  of  the  doors  x  and  y,  however,  his  difficulties  were  re- 
newed, but  he  finally  reached  the  exit. 

R.  B.  O.  describes  this  trial  as  much  more  systematic  than  the 
last  two.  He  did  more  planning,  more  rational  exploring.  He 
was  able  to  do  so  because  turns  and  passages  were  becoming 

familiar,  and  he  could  re- 
tain more  in  memory,  and 
therefore  tliink  better. 
He  describes  the  process 
as  one  of  "exploring,  and 
building  up  the  path." 
His  actual  knowledge  of 
the  maze,  however,  as  ex- 
pressed in  his  diagram, 
does  not  differ  much  from 
Figure  8.  R.  B.  O.'s  :  first  conception  of  X  what  he  had  known 
and  Y.    End  of  Trial  7.  before.     [See  Figure  8.] 

Trial  (V).  In  this  trial,  R.  B.  O.  learned  to  start  to  the  left 
directly  from  the  entrance,  and  thus  avoid  11-12.  This  he  calls 
a  purely  accidental  discovery.  He  made  no  headway,  however, 
with  the  regions  concerned  with  x  and  y.  No  matter  what  way 
he  turned,  he  got  back  to  the  door  a  again — he  did  not  know 
whether  or  not  there  were  two  doors.  His  knowledge  of  the 
maze  was  increased,  but  every  new  fact,  he  stated,  was  the 
result  of  accident :  "The  best  intelligence  I  have  doesn't  get  me 
anywhere." 

Trial  (VI)  objectively  represents  the  greatest  drop  in  the 
learning  curve,  but  it  was  the  result  of  chance,  the  subject 
thought,  and  did  not  represent  any  correlated  addition  to  his 
conception  of  the  path. 

Trial  (VII).  In  this  trial  the  center  of  study  shifted  entirely 
to  the  doors  x  and  3-.  The  net  result  of  an  exploration  in  that 
region  he  expressed  as  follows:  "Turn  any  way  you  want  to, 
at  this  door,  and  the  chances  are  that  you  find  yourself  back  at 
It  after  a  short  time."  He  repeatedly,  after  reaching  x  by  turn- 
mg  mto  B  from  A  on  10,  would  continue  on  B  to  5,  come  down 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION 


49 


Entrance 

Figure  9.    Second  idea  of  X  and  Y. 
Early  part  of  Trial  10. 


C  and  find  himself  at  the  same 
door  again ;  or  would  turn  cor- 
rectly at  X,  come  back  on  D, 
and  again  find  what  he  thought 
was  the  same  door.  He  studied 
long  on  this  problem,  but  was 
unable  to  figure  out  what  possi- 
ble arrangement  of  paths  and 
doors  could  result  in  such  an 
experience.  The  first  explana- 
tion that  he  gave  was  that  the 
maze  was  a  figure  8,  and  that 
the  true  path  intersected  at  this 
door.  He  reports  himself  at 
the  end  of  the  trial  as  "Com- 
pletely baffled — I  know  less 
than  I  did  at  the  beginning." 
Trial  (Vni).  While  this 
trial  was  made  with  only 
three  errors,  he  made  no  pro- 


gress in  the  difficulty  of  the  last  trial,  and  still  believed  the  maze 

was  a  figure  8.     [See  Figure  9.] 

Trial  (IX)  was  a  repetition  of  (VHI). 

Trial   (X).     The  intellectualizing  in  this  trial  consisted  in  a 

prolonged  attempt  to 
imagine  dififerent  spatial 
possibilities,  and  explain 
his  experience  in  terms  of 
them,  of  the  region  in  the 
vicinity  of  the  two  doors. 
The  diagrams  drawn  by 
the  subject  represent  his 
three  conceptions  of  the 
region,  in  the  order  of  their 
elaboration.  [Figure  10.] 
Trials  (XI-Xn-XHI). 
No  errors  were  made  in 
these  trials  and  the  maze 
was  called  learned.  Since 
the  explanation  he  had  last 

elaborated  worked,  he  "let  it  go  at  that''  as  he  said  in  the  last 

trial,  and  concerned  himself  only  with  the  task  of  making  the 

right  turns. 


£ntr<A.ncc 


Figure  id.    Final  idea  of  X  and  Y.  Trial  10. 


so  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

(2)  Subjects  E.  W.  B.  and  W.  S.  H. 

The  records  for  E.  W.  B.  and  W.  S.  H.  were  similar  to  those 
of  the  subject  just  described,  but  indicate  less  trouble  with  the 
maze.  Neither  of  them  had  the  difficulty  with  the  doors  x  and 
y  that  was  the  source  of  R.  B.  O.'s  confusion.  The  drawings 
they  made  after  each  trial  are  quite  comparable  with  those 
reproduced. 

The  learning  of  W.  S.  H.  offered  one  peculiarity,  inasmuch 
as  he  was  unable  to  learn  the  maze  technically,  in  the  trials  he 
made  because  of  the  fact  that  he  did  not  discover  the  shortest 
path.  This  subject,  at  the  end  of  trial  (XIII)  reported  the 
maze  "learned" — that  is,  he  had  gone  over  what  he  considered 
the  true  path  three  times  without  error.  He  had,  however, 
incorporated  the  section  11 -12  into  his  route,  and  hit  the  true 
path  after  going  through  Box  i  and  door  a.  He  had  not  doubted 
for  an  instant  that  this  section  was  part  of  his  regular  course. 

Since  the  experimenter  had  asked  for  the  shortest  path,  he 
informed  the  subject  that  he  had  not  fulfilled  the  conditions  of 
the  experiment  in  this  respect.  The  statement  was  made  that 
there  might  be  an  absolutely  new  path,  or  that  his  error  con- 
sisted in  not  discovering  one  or  more  short  cuts  in  the  path 
learned.     The  subject  then  started  on  a  new  trial. 

In  this  new  trial  W.  S.  H.  started  directly  to  the  right  several 
times,  and  attempted  to  discover  a  short  cut  from  Box  i.  After 
each  attempt  he  followed  the  old  path,  and  worked  in  5-10  for 
a  shorter  route  in  that  region.  Curiously  enough,  in  one  attempt 
he  started  directly  to  the  left  and  followed  the  shortest  path 
to  X,  but  he  got  confused  in  that  section,  retraced,  and  found 
himself  back  in  Box  i  again.  On  the  basis  of  this  experience 
he  dropped  the  idea  of  starting  directly  to  the  left.  After  two 
more  trials  in  which  no  more  headway  was  made,  the  lateness 
of  the  hour  prohibited  additional  experimentation,  and  the  maze 
was  called  "not  learned." 

(3)  Among  the  remaining  subjects,  M.  R.  F.  had  the  most 
difficulty,  with  E.  W.  B.  as  a  close  competitor,  while  J.  R.  A.  has 
the  smallest  number  of  errors  and  the  minimum  amount  of  time 
to  his  credit.     The  first  trial  of  M.  R.  F.  occupied  i  hour,  20', 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  Si 

and  56'',  and  resulted  in  175  errors.  The  chief  landmarks  she 
discovered  in  the  early  part  of  the  trial  were  the  "box,"  and  path 
A,  which  she  described  as  "some  considerable  curve."  As  in  the 
case  of  R.  B.  O.,  the  doors  x  and  3;  were  the  occasion  of  much 
wonder  and  not  a  little  disgust.  The  first  trial  was  characterized 
by  sharp  alterations  between  the  methods  of  trial  and  error,  and 
attempted  systematization  of  her  attempts.  On  the  whole,  her 
learning  seemed  to  follow  the  procedure  shown  by  R.  B.  O.  The 
efforts  of  E.  W.  B.  in  their  essential  aspects  were  in  turn  very 
similar  to  those  of  R.  B.  O.  and  M.  R.  F.  J.  R.  A.  started  in 
with  the  preconceived  scheme  to  follow  consistently  the  right  side 
of  the  path.  This  led  him  in  his  first  attempt  almost  directly  to 
Box  2,  but  it  also  led  him  back  to  the  entrance  from  that  place. 
Although  conscious  that  the  path  seemed  to  be  a  kind  of  narrow- 
ing spiral,  the  conception  of  a  side  exit  was  sufficiently  strong  to 
shut  out  any  idea  that  it  was  in  the  center.  The  exit  was  discov- 
ered by  pure  accident.  J.  R.  A.  elaborated  a  definite  verbal 
formula,  which  read,  beginning  at  the  end  of  A  on  10,  "right^ — 
left — right — left — right — right — left."  With  its  aid  the  path 
was  learned  successfully  in  short  time. 

3.     Summary  and  analysis  of  some  of  the  specific  aspects 

OF   THE   learning 

(a)  Imagery,  and  sensory  processes:  In  general,  image  and 
sense  material  functioned  in  the  same  manner  that  it  did  in  the 
first  experiment,  but  some  differences  in  the  behavior  of  these 
processes  in  the  respective  mazes  were  in  evidence.  The  tactual 
element  was  emphasized  much  more  strongly,  as  was  to  be  ex- 
pected from  the  fact  that  in  this  experiment  the  hands  were 
actually  employed  in  feeling  the  sides  of  the  maze.  Since,  how- 
ever, the  partitions  were  made  of  homogeneous  material,  and  the 
openings  were  similar  in  size  and  construction,  the  subject  did 
not  succeed  to  any  marked  extent  in  recognizing  familiar  land- 
marks by  tactual  cues  alone.  One  subject,  R.  B.  O.,  searched  the 
floor  for  irregularities  to  serve  as  points  of  reference,  but  was 
not  successful  in  this  attempt.  The  hands  and  amis  were  used 
mainly  in  informing  the  subject  when  doors  were  reached,  and  in 


52  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

keeping  him  from  walking  into  blind  alleys,  rather  than  in  making 
fine  discriminations.  Hence  those  who  used  gloves  found  that 
they  did  not  seriously  interfere  with  this  tactual  function. 

The  reports  on  imagery  follow  closely  those  made  in  the  pencil 
maze.  Verbal  processes  seem  to  have  been  called  upon  somewhat 
more  freely,  both  by  way  of  comment  and  elaboration  of  formula. 
Verbal  material  was  used  in  two  ways  (i)  in  the  "building  up" 
process,  of  discrimination  and  association — that  is,  in  studying 
out  situations.  (2)  It  was  employed  to  fix  landmarks  or  re- 
gions of  crisis — that  is,  the  verbal  formulas  used  consisted  of 
directions,  associated  with  particular  doors.  While  R.  B.  O. 
kneiv  the  maze  in  terms  of  visual  imagery,  he  had  used  verbal 
material  in  building  up  this  knowledge,  in  working  over  con- 
fused details.  W.  S.  H.  also  used  verbal  material  in  this  way, 
and  consequently  reported  it  as  dropping  out  towards  the  close. 
E.  W.  B.  used  words  to  "start"  himself — e.g.,  "Now  I'll  do 
so  and  so." 

Visual  imagery  was  reported  by  W.  S.  H.  to  be  more  accurate 
than  the  verbal  or  kinaesthetic  which  he  also  employed.  It  was 
the  visual  scheme  which  "set"  him  in  the  right  direction  at 
diverging  paths,  as  over  against  kinaesthetic,  which  was  more 
general  and  vague.  But  M.  R.  F.  used  relatively  less  visual  than 
she  did  in  the  pencil  maze. 

No  subject  reported  the  use  of  only  one  type  of  imagery,  as 
was  done  by  one  subject  in  the  pencil  maze,  W.  S.  H.,  who 
represented  a  combination,  used  verbal  in  some  regions,  kinaes- 
thetic in  others,  both  mixed  with  visual.  This  using  of  dift'erent 
kinds  for  different  segments  was  also  reported  in  the  preceding 
experiment. 

The  slight  differences  we  have  noted  in  the  use  of  imagery 
may  be  merely  matters  of  individual  variation,  or  they  may  be 
explained  by  the  fact  that  the  trials  were  longer  in  time,  than  in 
the  pencil  maze,  and  allowed  more  time  for  studying  or  memo- 
rizing, and  as  a  consequence  elicited  more  verbal  material.  It 
was  not  evident  from  the  introspections  that  imagery  was  em- 
ployed in  different  ways,  although  the  body  itself  was  in  motion 
in  this  experiment,  while  it  was  a  stationary  point  of  reference 
in  the  pencil  maze  experiment. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  53 

(b)  Habit  and  Attention:  We  did  not  discover  the  appear- 
ance of  habit,  in  the  sense  of  paths  being  run  unconsciously,  to 
the  extent  that  it  was  manifested  in  the  pencil  maze,  nor  did  the 
introspections  indicate  much  reliance  upon  this  factor  when  it  did 
appear.  Probably  this  latter  statement  is  the  more  significant 
one.  In  the  pencil  maze,  the  subject  made,  in  any  one  path,  a 
vigorous  sweep  with  the  pencil  and  was  stopped  rather  violently 
by  the  end  of  the  path.  The  greater  complexity  of  the  act 
of  walking  in  narrow  confines,  and  the  fact  that  sudden  contact 
with  the  end  of  a  passage  involved  physical  discomfort,  was  the 
explanation  the  subject  gave  for  the  greater  amount  of  caution 
used  in  the  "Mouse-trap." 

Again,  there  was  more  variation  of  objective  behavior  possible 
in  this  maze.  Any  given  sequence  of  turns  was  actually  made 
proportionately  a  less  number  of  times.  In  any  cul-de-sac  in  the 
pencil  maze,  the  subject  who  had  entered  it,  was  forced  to  ''back" 
out.  Cul-de-sac  regions  in  the  "Mouse-trap"  were  open  at  either 
end,  such  as  11-12,  or  B  C  D  E  in  5-7. 

The  introspections  on  the  last  trials  however,  disclosed  on 
the  part  of  R.  B.  O.  and  W.  S.  H.  a  decided  tendency  to  let 
down  on  the  active  attention  formerly  used — a  stage  which  in 
the  pencil  maze  was  the  fore-runner  of  automaticity. 

The  attention  during  the  learning  was  directed  in  the  same 
manner  that  it  was  in  the  preceding  experiment,  and  but  one 
point  of  distinction  appeared  in  the  reports.  As  before,  it  was 
either  retrospective,  engaged  with  present  experiences,  or  antici- 
patory. In  this  latter  aspect  of  its  behavior,  the  reports  in  the 
pencil  maze  were  to  the  effect  that  it  was  concerned  with  the 
turns  to  come  as  expressed  in  some  image  form.  In  the  park 
maze,  there  was  a  report  from  M.  R.  F.  that  her  attention  was 
at  times  concerned  with  a  more  general  state  of  expectancy,  or 
surmising,  or  guessing.  Other  reports  seemed  to  indicate  a 
tendency  towards  this  same  type  of  anticipatory  attention.  As 
the  maze  became  controlled,  the  anticipation,  as  before,  was  on 
the  turns  in  front  of  the  subject.  The  distinction  seemed  to  be  a 
relative  one. 

(c)  Discrimination,  Memory  and  Recognition:    The  fact  was 


54  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

mentioned  above  that  the  maze  was  composed  of  homogeneous 
material,  and  that  fine  tactual  discrimination  was  impossible. 
Discrimination  of  the  less  immediately  sensory  kind,  that  in- 
volved in  ascertaining  the  nature  of  the  paths  and  cul-de-sacs, 
had  in  it  therefore,  less  of  the  purely  sensory  element  than  the 
activity  in  the  pencil  maze.  It  was  of  the  kind  that  called  upon 
the  ability  of  the  learner  to  interpret  experiences  by  thinking, 
applying  concepts. 

It  was  assumed  by  the  experimenter  that  the  subject  would  in 
the  first  trial,  as  a  matter  of  discrimination  and  interpretation 
of  direct  sensory  experiences,  gain  the  idea  of  the  segmental 
and  curved  nature  of  the  paths,  and  would  be  able  to  interpret 
the  paths  as  belonging  to  a  concentric  system.  Since  the  sub- 
ject kept  one  hand  in  constant  contact  with  one  of  the  walls,  and 
since  the  lengths  of  the  segments  decreased  as  he  went  towards 
the  center,  it  was  thought  that  the  angle  of  30°  would  be  suffi- 
cient to  furnish  him  ample  cue  for  this  conception. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  all  of  them  did  note  that  the  paths  were 
irregular.  One  other  subject,  with  M.  R.  F.,  observed  in  (II) 
that  the  path  A  had  "some  considerable  curve."  They  were  a 
long  time  however  in  getting  the  concept  of  the  nature  of  the 
paths;  and  they  were  decidedly  late  in  hitting  upon  the  idea 
of  the  concentric  arrangement  of  the  paths.  Some  of  them 
hardly  got  the  idea  at  all.  The  drawings  reproduced  above 
sufficiently  indicate  the  tardiness  of  the  subjects  in  discriminating 
and  interpreting  the  sensory  experiences  of  the  maze. 

Inasmuch  as  discrimination  did  not  differentiate  the  various 
paths  to  a  degree  that  each  of  them  presented  distinct  peculiari- 
ties in  curvature  and  length,  the  number  of  regions  that  early 
became  definitely  familiar  was  small.  Box  i  was  a  landmark 
for  everybody  from  the  start.  The  doors  x  and  y  were 
distinct  from  others  doors,  but  being  in  themselves  alike,  they 
were  a  source  of  confusion  to  all  of  the  subjects.  The  region 
11-12  early  was  recognized,  inasmuch  as  it  was  a  series  of  al- 
ternating paths  without  outlets.  The  region  2-4  was  the  area 
of  greatest  confusion.  It  was  complex  in  arrangement  without 
offering  landmarks,  and  it  was  not  learned  by  any  subject. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  55 

In  the  pencil  maze,  the  fact  that  the  body  was  a  fixed  point 
of  reference  aided  the  process  of  discrimination  and  recognition, 
since  it,  (i),  gave  the  subject  a  fairly  accurate  idea  as  to  what 
part  of  the  maze,  (right,  left,  upper,  etc.)  he  was  in;  and,  (2), 
gave  the  subject  an  immediate  cue  as  to  the  direction  of  any  one 
path.  In  the  "Mouse-trap,"  the  absence  of  this  reference  point, 
together  with  the  fact  that  any  one  path  was  not  a  straight 
run,  but  was  composed  of  segments,  and  was  therefore  curved, 
tended  to  make  these  judgments  much  more  difficult.  The  park 
maze,  presenting  as  it  did,  more  variations  in  cul-de-sacs  types, 
instead  of  offsetting  this  disadvantage  by  way  of  holding  out 
more  individualistic  segments,  resulted  in  confusion,  because  of 
its  complexity.  The  most  difficult  region  in  the  pencil  maze, 
was  the  most  complex  cul-de-sac,  6-9,  which  was  simply  an  in- 
verted capital  T.  As  compared  with  the  3-4  region  in  the  park 
maze,  it  was  exceedingly  simple. 

Memory  in  both  mazes  was  obviously  employed  in  two  ways, 
(i)  Remembering  the  path,  after  it  was  once  learned,  was  one 
of  the  things  the  subject  would  be  assumed  to  effect.  Practically, 
this  meant,  however,  the  ability  to  remember  crucial  turns  in  the 
path,  where  opportunity  for  error  was  present.  J.  J.  T.  and 
others,  when  the  pencil  maze  was  learned,  were  not  able  to 
describe  the  true  path,  since  they  had  memorized  only  the  im- 
portant segments  of  the  path.  (2)  Studying  the  way  out  of 
difficult  regions  consisted  largely  of  calling  up  and  applying 
memory  experiences. 

The  second  function  of  memory  was  relatively  put  under  more 
strain  in  the  "Mouse-trap"  than  in  the  pencil  maze.  Once  they 
were  learned,  the  two  respective  paths  were  remembered  with 
relatively  equal  ease.  While  the  route  in  the  pencil  maze  con- 
sisted of  32  turns  as  over  against  9  in  the  other,  the  important 
thing  was  the  number  of  opportunities  for  error  in  the  two 
paths.  There  were  6  cul-de-sacs  discharging  into  the  true  path 
in  the  pencil  maze,  and  9  in  the  park  maze,  but  only  two  of  these, 
X  and  y,  proved  especially  difficult  to  remember. 

We  did  not  find  that  the  differences  in  physical  technique  in 
the  two  mazes  influenced  the  process  of  memorizing,  by  way  of 
making  it  either  more  or  less  difficult. 


56  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

(d)  Ilhtsioiis:  Evidence  has  already  been  offered  to  suggest 
that,  as  in  the  pencil  maze,  the  number  of  spatial  misconceptions 
was  pronounced.  The  reproduced  drawings  given  above  indi- 
cate the  nature  of  these  illusions  or  misconceptions. 

In  another  way,  this  phenomenon  was  brought  out.  The  sub- 
jects were  allowed  to  see  the  maze  after  it  was  learned.  Most 
of  them  expressed  intense  surprise  at  the  small  size  of  the 
"Mouse-trap"  when  actually  seen.  For  W.  S.  H.  it  dwindled 
down  to  one-half  its  size.  R.  B.  O.  made  the  proportions  in  the 
same  directions,  5  to  i.  Other  subjects  were  more  numerically 
conservative  in  the  same  judgment  with  the  exception  of 
E.  W.  B.,  who  reported  the  maze  as  larger,  not  smaller,  when 
actually  seen.  This  subject  had  made  rather  accurate  estimates 
of  dimensions  while  learning  the  maze,  but  some  of  the  essen- 
tial ones  had  been  smaller  than  the  segments  measured. 

(e)  Emotion  and  Affection:  The  "Mouse-trap"  seemed  to 
elicit  the  unpleasant  reactions  more  than  did  the  mazes  used 
before.  The  work  was  more  physically  fatiguing,  and  the  feel- 
ing of  being  hopelessly  lost  was  more  in  evidence.  M.  R.  F., 
towards  the  close  of  the  first  trial,  was  once  at  the  point  of  de- 
claring that  she  could  not  learn  the  maze.  There  was,  however, 
a  corresponding  elation  when  significant  discoveries  were  made. 
Only  in  the  case  of  W.  S.  H.  was  the  feeling  of  being  baffled 
in  evidence  towards  the  close,  when  he  was  directed  to  discover 
the  shorter  route.  This,  with  the  fatigue  that  had  developed 
by  that  time,  influenced  the  course  of  his  learning. 

Emotional  disturbance,  however,  played  a  positive  role  in  the 
learning  of  this,  as  well  as  the  other  difficult  mazes.  They  rep- 
resented periods  of  intense  consciousness,  in  the  same  way  that 
periods  of  mental  effort  meant  a  heightened  consciousness.  In 
either  case,  this  consciousness  was  called  into  being  when  the 
need  of  readjustment  was  imperative.  Current  psychological 
doctrine  asserts  that  cognitive  activity  functions  in  times  of 
conflict,  and  while  it  assumes  that  emotion  also  arises  under 
similar  conditions,  it  has  not  assigned  to  that  state  any  definite 
function.  That  function,  in  the  maze  learning  process,  is  indi- 
cated in  the  introspections. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  57 

The  subject  described  his  efforts,  while  under  the  stress  of  such 
excitement,  as  pure  trial  and  error ;  but  they  actually  represented 
an  entirely  different  thing  from  the  listless,  random  exploration 
that  was  on  other  occasions  characterized  by  the  same  subjects 
in  these  terms.  In  the  first  place,  the  subject  was  more,  not  less, 
sensitive  to  the  significance  of  the  attempts  he  made.  He  was 
decidedly  on  the  alert  for  possibilities.  Hence,  discoveries  made 
during  these  periods  were  utilized  and  reacted  upon  as  quickly 
and  efficiently  as  those  which  were  the  result  of  careful  study. 
Secondly,  the  effort  was  not  directed  by  any  interpretation  or 
theory — they  were  practically  thrown  to  the  winds.  As  a  result, 
openings  were  entered  that  were  nomially  labeled  as  cul-de-sacs, 
and  avoided.  It  was  the  effort  of  the  drowning  man  to  clutch 
at  the  last  straw;  and  such  an  expedient  often  turned  out  to  be 
highly  successful  in  the  maze.  S.  M.  R.  discovered  the  exit 
of  maze  M  in  such  a  period  during  which,  out  of  sheer  despera- 
tion, she  entered  the  cul-de-sac  complex  which  in  her  rational 
moments  she  had  avoided.^  In  general,  emotion  was  the  incen- 
tive to  a  more  inclusive  series  of  exploratory  movements  than  was 
the  case  when  these  attempts  were  controlled  by  ideas.  Emotion 
very  often  meant  increased  effort  upon  new  lines,  made  possible 
by  the  discarding  of  old  conceptions  and  theories ;  but  the 
value  of  the  reactions  was  not  lost  sight  of,  hence  they  were  often 
productive  of  positive  results.  Obviously,  emotion  carried  to 
the  extent  of  surrender,  to  a  cessation,  rather  than  an  increase, 
of  activity  and  effort,  would  defeat  its  own  purpose,  as  it  very 
nearly  did  in  the  two  cases  mentioned. 

(/)  Thinking:  The  fact  that  all  the  subjects  who  had  serious 
difficulty  with  the  maze  alternated  frequently  in  the  first  trial 
between  periods  of  active  study  and  periods  of  relatively  aimless 
trial  and  error  has  been  mentioned.  It  indicates  that  there  were 
definite  periods  in  the  subjective  aspect  of  the  learning  process  in 
which  the  higher  mental  activities  of  the  learners  were  called 
into  play.  This  fluctuation  also  characterized  the  subjects  in  the 
pencil  maze,  possibly  to  a  less  extent. 

The  experimenter  assumed,  at  the  beginning  of  trials,  that  the 

^Cf.  Experiment  III. 


58  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

"Mouse-trap"  afforded  more  opportunity  for  study,  for  thinking- 
out  situations,  than  did  the  pencil  maze  previously  employed. 
Its  cul-de-sac  formations  were  more  complex,  and  a  richet 
variety  of  experiences,  it  was  thought,  would  present  material 
for  a  more  complex  type  of  mental  reaction. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  our  assumption  turned  out  to  be  correct 
inasmuch  as  the  attitude  of  the  four  subjects  resembled  that 
of  M.  R.  F.  in  the  pencil  maze  more  than  it  did  that  of  H.  F.  A. 
For  J.  R.  A.,  the  maze  was  learned  too  easily  to  elicit  that  sub- 
ject's method  of  thinking  out  such  situations.  The  quality  of  the 
attempts  at  rationalizing,  however,  seemed  to  be  quite  compar- 
able with  those  brought  out  in  the  previous  experiment. 

None  of  the  subjects  guessed  or  reasoned  that  the  exit  might 
be  in  the  center,  rather  than  on  the  outside  of  the  maze.  Predi- 
lection was  against  them,  it  is  true,  on  this  point :  those  who  had 
previously  worked  with  animal  mazes  were  accustomed  to  the 
side  exit  formation.  But  after  J.  R.  A.  had  in  the  first  trial 
followed  the  true  path  almost  directly  to  the  center,  and  had 
discovered  rather  definitely  the  concentric  nature  of  the  paths, 
it  did  not  occur  to  him  that  the  exit  was  possibly  there.  Two 
subjects  reported  that  in  the  first  trial  they  were  definitely  work- 
ing for  the  outside.  They  did  not  question  the  presumption  that 
the  exit  would  be  here. 

As  in  the  pencil  maze,  and  to  a  greater  extent,  general  working 
ideas  were  in  evidence- — definite  rational  methods  of  attack.  Thus 
J.  R.  A.  and  M.  R.  F.  resorted  to  counting  their  steps  in  specific 
places  where  estimations  of  lengths  were  desired.  The  scheme 
to  follow  all  turns  to  the  right,  or  to  the  left,  the  plan  of  R.  B.  O., 
(IV),  to  locate  various  central  points  of  reference,  and  work  out 
in  all  directions  from  these,  and  even  the  deliberate  adoption  of 
a  random  hit  or  miss  method  are  examples  of  the  general  control 
ideas — ideas  that  were  the  result  of  definite  judgment  to  the 
effect  that  they  might  prove  efficient. 

The  actual  efficiency  of  these  general  methods  was  extremely 
hard  to  determine.  J.  R.  A.  hit  upon  a  plan  that  resulted  in 
speedy  learning.  M.  R.  F.  conceived  the  same  idea,  but  it  did 
not  work  for  her.     She  had  also,  in  Experiment  I,  in  the  corre- 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  59 

spending  trial  (I),  attempted  and  dropped  this  working  scheme. 

The  extended  study  R.  B.  O.  made  of  the  doors  x  and  3;  has 
already  been  described.  It  seemed  in  every  way  comparable  with 
the  study  made  by  M.  H.  S.  H.  of  the  cul-de-sac  6-9  in  the  pencil 
maze.  It  certainly  involved  the  mechanism  of  the  reasoning 
processes:  it  was  something  more  than  sensory  discrimination, 
or  imagining,  or  memorizing.  But  the  actual  solution  was  an 
accidental  discovery. 

The  difficulty  of  labeling  the  type  of  mental  activity  in  evidence 
was  as  obvious  in  this  experiment  as  in  the  previous  one. 
W.  S.  H.,  after  being  informed  that  he  had  not  discovered  the 
shortest  path,  actually  did  go  directly  from  entrance  to  door  x 
in  his  endeavor  to  find  the  short  cut.  His  attitude  was  one  of 
sharp  attention — he  was  on  the  lookout  for  cues,  he  was  doing  all 
the  thinking  he  could  do.  But  with  all  that  effort,  he  did  not 
interpret  sensory  experiences  in  an  adequate  way.  Systematic 
thinking  seemed  to  be  extremely  difficult,  or  impossible. 

4.  The  objective  results 

The  objective  records,  presented  in  the  form  of  curves,  show 
a  relatively  different  distribution  of  time  and  error  from  that 
of  the  pencil  maze.  A  greater  proportion  of  effort  was  centered 
in  the  first  trial,  in  this  experiment,  and  the  ensuing  trials  are 
more  free  from  irregularities. 

The  introspections,  and  the  fact  that  the  records  from  the 
pencil  maze  employed  in  Experiment  III  are  comparable  with 
the  results  from  the  "Mouse-trap"  in  this  respect,  indicate  that 
the  cause  of  the  relative  dift'erence  in  the  distribution  of  effort  is 
to  be  looked  for  in  the  plan  of  the  maze,  rather  than  in  the  fact 
that  it  was  a  maze  calling  for  a  different  physical  technique,  or 
other  factors. 

The  reports  on  the  role  of  discrimination  and  memory  ex- 
plain the  relatively  greater  emphasis  on  the  difficulties  of  the 
first  trial.  By  far  the  most  difficult  part  of  the  maze  was  the  half 
on  the  entrance  side.  This  was  practically  one  system  of  cul-de- 
sacs,  since  only  one  door  opened  into  it  from  the  true  path,  in 
addition  to  the  option  offered   at  the  entrance.     An   immense 


6o  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

amount  of  exploration  was  necessar}^  for  the  subject  to  learn  not 
to  enter  door  a  and  not  to  start  to  the  right.  These  items,  once 
learned,  were  easily  remembered,  while  the  actual  scheme  of 
these  cul-de-sacs  was  speedily  dropped  from  memory.  On  the 
basis  of  similar  records  from  Experiment  III  we  might  assume 
that  a  maze  of  this  type  would  tend  to  throw  the  emphasis  on 
the  first  trial,  while  a  maze  consisting  of  a  long  true  path,  with  a 
number  of  cul-de-sacs  distributed  along  its  course,  would  give 
a  curve  characterized  by  a  less  pronounced  initial  decline,  and  a 
more  uniform  distribution  of  irregularities. 

As  in  the  preceding  experiment,  it  was  obviously  not  easy  to 
correlate  efficiency  with  any  one  abstracted  activity.  Some  of 
the  simplest  mental  operations  seemed  to  have  involved  in  them 
a  rather  complex  type  of  mental  organization. 

D.     EXPERIMENT  III 

The  results  of  Experiments  I  and  II  had  indicated  and  em- 
phasized an  apparently  paradoxical  behavior  of  the  rational 
aspect  of  the  learning  process.  The  fact  had  been  made  evident 
in  every  introspection  that  the  subject  employed  in  his  learning, 
not  a  number  of  isolated  activities,  such  as  imagery,  discrimina- 
tion, and  others,  but  a  more  essentially  complex  type  of  reaction. 
Sensory  discrimination  had  involved  in  it,  for  instance,  imaginal 
and  conceptional  factors.  Yet  for  all  this  complexity  of  the  sub- 
jective aspect  of  the  learning,  the  actual  attempts  at  systematic 
reasoning  were  crude  in  the  extreme,  as  measured  by  the  simpli- 
city of  the  problems  when  presented  visually.  It  was  thought 
not  only  desirable  but  necessary  to  conduct  an  experiment  espe- 
cially designed  to  emphasize  the  ability  of  the  subject  to  think 
coherently  and  systematically,  or  to  reason.  Accordingly, 
Experiment  III  was  conducted  with  this  object  in  mind. 

In  order  to  control  this  special  phase  of  the  learner's  activity 
for  the  purposes  of  a  more  exact  investigation,  two  conditions 
were  observed  in  the  experiment.  (I)  The  subject  was  in- 
structed to  take  an  overtly  rational,  thinking,  reasoning  attitude 
towards  his  learning,  even  if  he  became  convinced  that  such  a 
procedure  did  not  count  towards  the  greatest  efficiency.     In  the 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  6l 

preceding  tests,  it  will  be  remembered,  he  was  permitted  to 
take  any  attitude  he  saw  fit.  (II)  Two  mazes  were  built,  which 
in  addition  to  offering  difficulties  similar  to  those  encountered 
before,  presented  special  formation  designed  to  elicit  the  maxi- 
mum amount  of  reasoning. 

I .     Apparatus 

(a)  The  mazes  employed  were  of  the  pencil  variety.  For  this 
experiment,  and  for  future  investigation,  the  writer  designed 
a  maze  base,  upon  which  any  alteration  in  maze  pattern  could 
easily  be  made.  Upon  the  upper  surface  of  a  solid  oak  base, 
14^  by  20  inches  in  size  and  i^  inch  thick,  two  series  of 
parallel  grooves  were  cut,  extending  from  side  to  side  and  from 
end  to  end,  so  that  they  intersected  at  right  angles,  and  cut  the 
upper  surface  up  into  a  complete  checker-board.  The  grooves 
were  unifonnly  ^  inch  in  thickness,  ^  inch  deep,  and  ^ 
inch  apart.  Into  them  were  inserted  steel  strips  to  serve  as 
the  sides  of  the  maze  paths,  and  between  these  strips  brass 
flooring  was  laid.  With  an  assorted  number  of  brass  and 
steel  strips,  any  desirable  combination  of  path  sequences  could 
be  easily  constructed.  For  the  open  space  built  into  maze  M, 
(see  diagram,  Fig.  12,  and  description)  a  solid  brass  plate,  of  the 
same  thickness  as  the  flooring,  was  laid.  The  exit  of  this  maze 
was  in  the  interior,  at  the  end  of  a  blind  passage.  An  electric 
buzzer  was  used  to  inform  the  subject  when  he  had  attained  it. 
The  brass  flooring  in  this  passage  was  cut  off  so  that  it  lacked 
i^  inches  from  extending  to  the  end  wall,  and  the  floor  was 
continued  by  a  thinner  strip  of  steel,  slightly  raised  above  the 
wood  base,  and  free  at  its  outer  end,  so  that  pressure  upon  it 
made  an  electric  contact  with  a  wire  run  through  the  base  of  the 
maze,  and  started  the  buzzer.  Two  mazes,  L  and  M,  were  con- 
structed with  this  apparatus,  and  used  in  Experiment  III. 

{b)  Object  of  the  designs  of  the  two  ma::;es:  Maze  L.  The 
pattern  of  the  path  formations  in  this  maze  was  elaborated  to 
present  difficulties  by  way  of  the  similarity  of  two  different  paths. 
Similarity  in  the  mazes  previously  used  had  made  discrimination 
extremely  difficult.     In  maze  L  it  was  attempted  to  arrange  the 


62 


F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 


paths  in  such  a  manner  that  this  difficulty  could  be  overcome  by 
a  relative  reliance  upon  reasoning  processes,  as  over  against  a 
trial  and  error  method.     [See  Figure  1 1.] 

The  object  of  the  experiment  in  brief  was  this :  Two  paths, 
A  and  B  (in  maze  L),  were  of  sufficient  relative  length  to  set 
them  off  as  distinct  land-marks  for  the  learner,  but  since  they 


XL 


B 


U 


hit  Entrance 


Figure  ii.     Maze  L. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  63 

were  similar  in  position,  and  in  their  respective  turns  at  either 
end,  the  diffictiky  would  be  in  ascertaining  whether  they  were 
really  two  paths  or  one.  Efficient  learning,  however,  depended 
upon  the  subject's  ability  to  determine  this  point :  if  from  the 
lower  part  of  the  maze  only  one  long  path  ascended  to  a  cul- 
de-sac  in  the  upper  part  of  the  maze,  then  it  was  useless  for  the 
subject  to  traverse  this  path,  since  he  had  to  return  by  it.  If  there 
were  two  paths,  there  was  the  possibility  that  both  were  sections 
of  the  true  path  (as  was  actually  the  case). 

It  was  obvious  that  each  subject  would:  (i)  raise  this  issue 
as  just  formulated,  or  (2),  would  assume  without  question  on 
the  start  that  there  was  but  one  path,  only  to  be  disillusioned  later, 
or  (3),  would  perceive  on  the  first  trial  that  there  were  really  two 
paths.  It  was  correctly  assumed  by  the  experimenter  that  one 
of  the  options  indicated  under  (i)  or  (2)  would  characterize 
the  learning  of  the  majority  of  the  subjects.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  only  two  of  them  saw  from  the  start  that  there  were  two 
paths,  and  accordingly,  no  special  difficulty  presented  itself  to 
these  two. 

The  two  paths  were  parallel,  and  so  alike  in  length,  that  dis- 
crimination on  this  score  was  found  to  be  practically  impossible. 
At  the  top,  the  three  turns  and  one  cul-de-sac  leading  off  from 
the  paths  were  similar;  at  the  lower  end,  both  turned  to  the  right, 
then  up,  then  right,  with  an  option  on  the  last  turn.  One  dis- 
tinguishing mark  was  made.  Path  B  had  at  its  immediate  upper 
extremity  a  square  opening  to  the  left,  while  A  at  its  top  per- 
mitted the  subject  to  turn  only  to  the  right. 

It  was  assumed  that  logically  a  reasoner,  in  attempting  to 
discriminate  or  differentiate  between  two  things  in  any  problem, 
would  seek  some  distinguishing  mark.  In  this  case,  that  mark 
was  put  directly  on  one  of  the  paths.  Logically,  the  subject 
could  formulate  the  problem  as  follows:  "If  there  are  really 
two  paths,  the  possibility  is  that  one  of  them  presents  some  point 
of  difference  from  the  other.  This  distinguishing  sign  is  to  be 
sought,  first  in  the  path  itself,  and  next,  in  the  respective  se- 
quences of  turns  at  either  end." 

Maze  M.     In  designing  this  maze  [Fig.  12]  the  experimenter 


64  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

was  prompted  primarily  by  the  fact  brought  out  in  the  "Mouse- 
trap," where  the  controlHng  idea  that  the  exit  was  to  the  outside 
of  the  maze  distinctly  prolonged  the  learning  of  some  of  the 
subjects.  In  maze  M  the  exit  was  at  the  place  marked  X  and 
the  subject  was  informed  when  he  had  reached  it  by  the  fact 
that  a  buzzer  was  sounded.  He  was  given  none  of  this  infor- 
mation however,  at  the  beginning  of  the  first  trial.     Once  again 


i.. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  65 

we  attempted  to  give  the  subject  a  cue  which  could  be  reacted 
upon  in  a  reasoning  way.  Path  A  completely  encircled  the  maze, 
and  brought  the  subject  back  to  the  entrance.  Since  it  offered 
no  other  opening  to  the  outside,  the  exit  must  be  somewhere 
within  the  maze. 

It  was  assumed  that  most  of  the  subjects  would  make  the  tour 
of  path  A  in  the  first  trial.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  all  of  them  did. 
Since  they  were  asked  to  use  a  rational  attitude,  to  keep  them- 
selves alert  for  material  to  think  about,  it  was  thought  that  such 
a  formation  would  offer  the  necessary  data. 

Two  additional  points  were  in  mind  in  designing  both  mazes : 
(a)  Several  cul-de-sacs,  like  those  in  the  park  maze,  represented 
deviations  from  the  typical  cul-de-sac  formation,  such  as  that 
found  in  the  first  maze  we  employed.  It  was  desired  to  study  the 
reaction  the  subject  would  make  to  a  new  situation,  under  the 
new  instructions,  and  to  determine  whether  or  not  new  construc- 
tions deterred  the  learning.  (2)  The  subject  was  asked  to  learn 
the  shortest  route.  As  a  separate  problem,  it  was  desired  to 
ascertain  the  manner  in  which  the  subject  could  prove  that  the 
path  he  had  learned  was  the  shortest. 

2.  Method 

The  greatest  innovation  introduced  into  the  method  was  the 
instruction  mentioned,  that  the  subject  was  to  do  all  the  thinking 
and  reasoning  possible  in  his  learning.  Since  any  given  problem 
often  extended  over  several  trials,  it  was  thought  best  to  hold 
them  in  succession,  with  10-15  minute  intervals  between  trials. 
The  maze  was  clamped  to  the  table  after  the  manner  described  in 
Experiment  I.  The  subject  faced  the  entrance  side  of  each 
maze,  so  that  U  in  maze  L  was  called  the  upper  or  top  side  of 
the  maze.  The  following  subjects  learned  the  two  mazes : 
J.  R.  A.,  J.  W.  H.,  M.  H.  S.  H.,  M.  R.  F.,  S.  M.  R.,  C.  N., 
W.  S.  H.,  R.  B.  O. 

3.  Results 

(a)  An  analysis  of  the  Icatniing  inctliod  employed  in  the  solu- 
tion of  the  different  problems  presented:     The  observation  of 


66  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

the  objective  behavior  gave  sHght  indication  only,  if  any  at  all, 
that  a  different  working  attitude  had  been  imposed  upon  the 
learners.  It  was  practically  impossible  to  tell  by  the  keenest 
watching  what  schemes,  if  any,  were  being  acted  upon.  The 
subjects  however  found  that  by  commenting  aloud  they  were  all 
the  more  able  to  formulate  their  ideas,  and  in  this  way,  as  in  the 
park  maze,  the  observer  was  given  a  check  on  introspective 
reports  and  on  behavior. 

(i)  The  parallel  paths  in  maze  L.  The  plan  of  the  parallel 
path  arrangement  was  a  source  of  serious  trouble  for  most  of 
the  learners.  Maze  L  proved  to  be  the  most  difficult  maze  to 
learn  employed  in  any  of  the  experimental  work.  The  following 
summarized  accounts  give  the  essential  aspects  of  the  methods 
employed  by  the  learners. 

(i)  Subject  R.  B.  O.  This  subject  spent  two  hours  and  a  half, 
distributed  over  five  trials,  in  the  situation  offered  by  the  maze — 
(the  greatest  total  time  spent  in  learning  the  first  maze,  Experi- 
ment I,  was  less  than  one  hour).  In  trial  (I)  A  was  noticed 
and  commented  upon  as  being  extremely  long  when  he  first 
ascended  it  to  the  U  region.  Here  he  became  confused,  and 
when  he  finally  found  the  exit  through  B,  he  assumed  that  there 
was  one  path  only,  leading  to  a  complicated  cul-de-sac  at  its  top. 
No  progress  was  made  in  trial  (II).  In  (III)  he  hit  upon  the 
idea  of  two  paths,  but  in  an  attempt  to  escape  from  U  he 
repeatedly  came  down  A,  thinking  it  was  the  escape  path  B  and 
he  began  to  doubt  his  theory.  In  (IV)  the  subject  went  almost 
directly  from  A  to  B  through  U  several  times,  but  conceived  the 
the  idea  that  he  was  traveling  in  a  circle,  and  refused  to  come 
more  than  half  way  down  either  path.  He  began  to  question 
all  the  more  the  possibility  of  two  paths,  and  by  the  end  of  the 
trial  he  definitely  decided  there  was  but  one.  Trial  (IV)  was 
continued  into  the  next  day,  as  the  subject  was  fatigued  at  the 
end  of  36  minutes.  In  this  second  attempt  the  subject  spent  a 
full  15  minutes  trying  to  find  the  exit  without  going  up  A.  He 
resorted  to  the  scheme  of  going  half  way  up  this  path,  and 
then  retracing  down,  because,  as  he  said,  "I  find  the  exit  after 
coming  down  this  path."     Several  times  he  reached  the  first 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  67 

turn  off  A  at  U  but  refused  to  go  farther:  "I  know  all  about 
that  territory,  (i.e.,  knew  it  was  cul-de-sac  region)  and  don't 
intend  to  get  mixed  up  in  it."  He  did  finally  as  a  last  resort 
explore  the  region  and  found  himself  in  J.  Then  he  made  the 
discovery:  "There  are  two  of  them,  because  the  other  one 
doesn't  have  this  notch  at  the  top."  The  subject  had  entered  J 
several  times  before,  in  the  preceding  trials,  but  it  had  not  at- 
tracted his  attention. 

(ii)  Subject  M.  H.  S.  H.  The  idea  that  there  were  two 
paths  occurred  to  this  subject  in  (I)  but  she  located  the  descend- 
ing path  to  the  right  of  the  ascending  one,  on  the  basis  of  the 
kinaesthetic  feel  of  arm  stretch.  By  (IV)  she  was  skeptical  of 
her  theory  of  the  two  paths:  "They  feel  just  alike,  but  some- 
times I  get  out  after  coming  down  the  long  stretch,  and  some- 
times I  don't."  In  (VII)  she  spent  23  minutes  attempting  to 
find  the  exit  without  going  up  A,  and  on  this  basis,  assumed  that 
after  all  there  were  two,  and  also  assumed,  without  question,  that 
the  one  to  the  right  was  the  descending  path.  By  (IX)  she  was 
suspicious  again :  "There  really  seems  to  be  but  one  path,  and 
the  turns  at  either  end  are  alike,  but  sometimes  it  doesn't  lead 
me  to  the  exit."  That  is,  like  the  other  subjects,  she  often  came 
down  A  thinking  it  was  B.  In  (X)  it  occurred  to  her  for  the 
first  time,  in  describing  the  maze  in  her  introspection,  that  if 
the  ascending  path  were  to  the  left,  the  two  paths  must  intersect 
somewhere  in  L,  since  she  had  found  that  the  exit  was  to  the  left 
of  the  entrance.  In  the  next  trial  the  subject  descended  B  twice 
in  succession,  went  around  the  "Square,"  and  back  to  U.  She 
was  quite  sure,  however,  that  she  had  taken  a  different  descend- 
ing path  each  time.  Therefore  she  was  certain  that  A  and  B 
intersected  in  L  because  they  both  led  into  the  same  region  in 
that  vicinity.  In  answer  to  a  question,  she  said  she  could  not 
prove  it,  or  reason  it  out — there  was  nothing  to  reason  on.  But 
there  did  not  seem  to  be  room  at  the  bottom  for  two  paths  so 
nearly  alike,  and  stretching  over  so  much  territory.  Therefore 
there  was  perhaps  only  one  path  after  all.  In  (XIII  and  XIV) 
she  accidently  noticed  that  a  joint  in  the  floor  in  the  lower  end 
of  A  was  more  uneven  than  the  one  in  B.    There  must  be  two  of 


68  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

them,  therefore.  This  being  settled,  trial  (XVI)  was  directed  at 
a  more  specialized  problem :  since  she  had  established  the  identity 
of  the  two  paths,  the  question  was  to  tell  which  she  was  entering 
from  U — they  both  felt  alike,  and  she  had  no  way  of  telling  until 
she  reached  the  bottom.  In  (XVIII)  she  discovered  J  for  the 
first  time  (she  had  been  repeatedly  entering  it),  found  that  a 
similar  projection  did  not  mark  A,  and  soon  learned  to  go  through 
this  part  of  the  maze  without  error.  She  had  gradually  given  up 
the  idea  that  A  was  to  the  right  of  B. 

(iii)  Subject  M.  R.  F.  The  learning  of  this  subject  followed 
very  closely  that  of  M.  H.  S.  H.  Like  her,  she  raised  the  question 
of  the  possibility  of  the  existence  of  the  two  paths  in  the  first 
trial,  and  similarly,  she  thought  that  the  ascending  path  was  to  the 
left  of  the  descending  path.  This  suggested  at  once  however, 
the  two  must  intersect  somewhere  at  the  bottom,  since  she  was 
sure  of  the  correct  relationship  of  exit  and  entrance.  The  sub- 
ject resolved  to  perfect  the  route  she  had  learned  before  she  at- 
tempted a  study  of  the  situation.  By  (VI)  she  had  the  path 
fairly  well  learned,  and  in  this  trial  also  she  discovered  that  J, 
which  she  had  noticed  before,  was  at  the  top  of  B  only.  This 
landmark  she  retained  as  a  cue  to  tell  her  on  which  path  she  was 
descending.  The  subject  finally  decided  that  she  had  misjudged 
the  position  of  the  two  paths. 

(iv)  Subject  J.  R.  A.  This  subject  in  his  first  trial  ascended 
and  descended  A  several  times  before  finding  B.  He  immediately 
assumed,  at  the  close  of  the  trial,  that  the  two  paths  existed, 
because  one  got  him  out  and  the  other  did  not.  He  also  correctly 
assumed  that  the  return  path  was  the  outer  one,  because  it  seemed 
to  extend  farther  up  than  path  A.  The  rest  of  the  learning  pre- 
sented no  serious  difficulty  to  the  subject. 

(v)  Subject  C.  N.  This  learner  believed  after  the  first  trial  that 
one  long  path  ascended  to  a  cul-de-sac  territory  at  the  top  of  the 
maze,  and  that  it  was  not  necessary  to  go  up  this  path  at  all. 
Most  of  trial  (II)  was  spent  in  an  effort  to  find  a  shorter  cut  to 
the  exit,  but  after  20  minutes  endeavor  in  this  direction,  she 
decided  to  try  the  possibility  of  the  long  path.  In  doing  so  she 
discovered  J,  remembered  that  she  had  found  it  in  coming  up, 
and  concluded  that  there  were  two  paths. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  69 

Of  the  other  two  subjects,  the  reports  of  J.  W.  H.  follow 
those  of  J.  R.  A.,  and  the  account  of  W.  S.  H.  is  similar  to  that 
of  the  subject  just  described. 

(2)  The  location  of  the  exit  of  maze  M.  The  discovery  of  the 
inner  exit  of  this  maze  was  practically  a  matter  of  accident,  as 
it  was  in  the  case  of  the  park  maze.  M.  R.  F.  in  her  first  trial 
directly  made  the  circuit  of  the  outside  path  A  several  times,  in 
one  of  which  she  kept  consistently  to  the  outside  wall.  Al- 
though she  recognized  the  nature  of  the  path,  as  leading  her 
back  to  the  entrance,  and  although  she  had  the  idea  rather  defin- 
itely  in  mind  of  finding  the  exit  somewhere  on  the  outside  of  the 
maze,  the  fact  that  it  could  not  be  there  did  not  suggest  itself. 
Her  motive,  when  she  did  finally  approach  the  interior,  was  to 
get  off  this  path.  She  reports  however  a  vague  and  non-focal 
state  of  questioning  hozv  the  surrounding  path  would  affect  the 
rest  of  the  maze. 

J.  W.  H.  reports  that  he  did  wonder  vaguely  about  the  exit 
after  he  had  made  the  circuit  of  A.  He  did  not  formulate  this 
into  a  definite  question  however.  He  had  conceived  of  the  elec- 
tric wiring  as  a  device  to  mark  cul-de-sacs,  and  did  not  connect 
it  with  the  exit. 

J.  R.  A.  stated  that  his  definite  working  scheme  of  making 
all  the  right  turns  tended  to  exclude  questionings  about  the  exit. 
He  too  went  around  A,  sticking  closely  to  the  outside,  without 
perceiving  that  the  exit  must  be  within.  This  report  is  an  exact 
duplicate  of  the  testimony  of  the  same  subject  in  the  "Mouse- 
trap." 

No  subject  got  the  suggestion  of  the  exit  after  encircling  the 
maze,  although  all  of  them  did  so  in  the  first  trial  before  they 
located  it. 

(3)  The  perception  of  new  formations  in  the  mazes.  Con- 
clusive evidence  had  been  offered  in  the  park  introspections  in 
the  case  of  R.  B.  O.  with  x  and  y,  and  with  the  other  subjects 
in  regard  to  the  exit,  to  indicate  that  a  novel  arrangement  of 
paths  or  cul-de-sacs,  not  only  taxed  the  ability  of  the  subject  to 
interpret  new  situations,  but  was  directly  the  cause  of  a  delay 
in  the  learning.     Each  subject  applied  some  concept  to  the  new 


70 


F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 


— 

^ 

Figure  13 
S.  M.  R. 


The  "Square"  of 


kinaesthetic  and  cutaneous  experiences :  the  one  that  gave  the 
most  immediate  and  satisfactory  meaning  to  the  experiences  was 
accepted.  Such  conceptions  proved  to  be  inadequate  quite  often, 
from  the  point  of  view  of  practical  results. 

Subject  S.  M.  R.  in  maze  L  offered  an  instance  of  such  an 
inadequate  interpretation,  in  her  idea  of  the  "Square."    [Fig.  13.] 

For  a  full  period  of  20  minutes  in 
trial  I  she  refused  to  come  down 
path  B,  because  of  the  fact  that  the 
first  time  she  had  done  so  she  went 
directly  around  the  square  and  up 
B,  and  conceived  the  situation  to  be 
as  she  represented  in  her  drawing. 
As  was  the  case  with  so  many  con- 
ceptions concerning  the  maze,  it  was 
a  matter  of  assuming  a  situation 
without  question,  rather  than  a 
process  of  fomiulating  an  option,  or 
criticizing  the  conception.  An  example  of  this  was  brought 
out  in  Experiment  I,  in  which  the  subjects  so  many  times  went 
to  a  turn  in  the  true  path,  and  retraced,  thinking  it  was  the 
blind  ending  of  a  cul-de-sac. 

About  half  the  subjects  in  their  first  experiences  with  the 
"Square"  interpreted  it  as  did  S.  M.  R.,  but  they  discovered 
their  mistake  before  the  idea  resulted  in  serious  harm. 

The  record  of  this  same  subject  presents  another  instance  of 
uncritical  judgment  of  maze  formations  in  maze  M.  Early  in 
trial  (i)  she  got  into  the  vicinity  of  the  exit,  and  conceived  the 
whole  area  immediately  to  be  cul-de-sac  territory.  She  refused 
for  a  long  time  to  enter  door  a  because,  having  located  it  as  the 
entrance  to  that  region,  she  said:  "Anybody  ought  to  have 
sense  enough  to  avoid  a  place  like  that."  This  conception,  after 
she  had  explored  thoroughly  the  possibilities  of  the  surrounding 
path  A,  delayed  her  reaching  the  exit  for  a  full  half  hour. 

Several  subjects  in  maze  M  started  to  the  right  and  came  back 
on  B  to  regain  A,  in  the  same  way  that  W.  H.  S.  made  11-12  a 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  n 

part  of  the  true  route  in  the  "Mouse-trap."  They  accidently 
discovered  sooner  or  later  the  nature  of  the  paths. 

The  cul-de-sacs  to  the  immediate  right  of  the  open  area  in 
maze  M  proved  to  be  the  most  difficult  situation  to  formulate  in 
the  maze.  The  open  space  itself  was  peculiar  without  being 
complex,  and  the  one  thing  that  made  the  path  easy  to  learn. 

The  general  result  may  be  summed  up  in  the  statement  that 
new  situations  retarded  the  learning,  unless  they  were  so  simple 
and  distinct  that  they  afforded  definite  cues  for  orientation,  in 
which  cases  they  facilitated  the  learning. 

(4)  The  shortest  path.  The  discovery  of  the  shortest  path 
proved  to  be  a  matter  of  difficulty  to  only  two  of  the  subjects. 
The  others,  after  having  once  learned  to  turn  left  on  C,  easily 
learned  to  enter  the  open  space  through  the  upper  left  hand  area 
and  go  diagonally  across  it.  The  special  possibilities  as  to  rela- 
tive lengths  in  general  were  perceived,  as  a  matter  of  sensory 
discrimination,  without  effort. 

M.  R.  F.,  however,  learned  the  route  as  turning  to  the  right 
on  C,  then  up,  and  across  the  top  of  the  maze  to  the  left  on  the 
corresponding  path.  Her  discovery  of  the  left  side  route  was 
purely  accidental  according  to  her  reports,  and  was  the  result 
of  going  too  far  to  the  left  in  one  trial  as  she  was  making  this 
trip,  and  coming  back  to  the  entrance.  W.  S.  H.  did  not  learn 
the  shortest  path  from  the  open  area  to  the  exit  until  after  he 
had  habitually  turned  up  after  leaving  it,  and  had  come  down 
the  path  directly  over  door  a.  His  discovery  was  accidental,  and 
similar  to  that  of  M.  R.  F. 

(5)  The  nature  of  the  attitude  employed  in  Experiment  HI. 
The   subjects   were   unanim'ous   in   their   statements   that   the 

method  employed,  in  spite  of  heroic  attempts  to  follow  the  in- 
structions given,  was  not  materially  dift'erent  from  that  employed 
in  the  other  mazes.  The  nature  of  the  type  of  reasoning  they 
found  it  possible  to  do  was  practically  the  same  as  that  indulged 
in  when  they  were  left  to  their  own  method.  The  common  state- 
ment was  that  they  had  nothing  to  reason  on.  The  data  had  to  be 
acquired  by  trial  and  error,  and  the  significant  discoveries  were 
made  in  such  hit  or  miss  performances. 


72  p.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

They  did  assume  an  attitude,  somewhat  forced  and  artificial, 
differing  sHghtly  from  their  natural  method  of  attack.  This  was 
found  to  consist  in  (i)  an  attempt  to  'think-out'  certain  possi- 
bilities by  way  of  theory  or  conjecture,  or  to  follow  a  systematic 
method  of  exploration.  Thus  W.  S.  H.,  maze  L  (I),  speculated 
as  to  which  side  of  the  maze  the  exit  might  be  located.  Thus 
J.  R.  A.  and  others  followed  one  side  of  the  path,  exploring  all 
its  possibilities  first.  (2)  A  second  characteristic  of  the  process 
was  the  more  acute  attention  paid  to  experiences  and  cues.  This 
attention  was  concerned  at  times  with  a  definite  object :  several  of 
the  subjects,  after  they  had  formulated  the  difficulty  in  maze  L, 
were  overtly  on  the  lookout  for  distinguishing  cues.  What  they 
did  not  do  was  to  search  for  these  cues  in  a  systematic  manner. 
This  was  practically  an  impossible  task,  so  they  reported,  since 
the  major  part  of  their  attention  had  to  concern  itself  with  im- 
mediate orientation,  and  since  also  they  were  forced  to  stay  in 
the  maze  paths — had  they  been  permitted  to  jump  from  one 
section  to  another,  more  systematic  exploration  might  have  been 
possible.  The  two  distinctions  given  were  relative  only:  it  was 
a  process  of  slightly  more  emphasis  upon  methods  that  all  of  the 
subjects  employed,  and  whidh  they  could  not  help  employing. 

{h)  The  objective  results:  The  sudden  decrease  in  the  time  and 
errors  in  the  2-5  trials  indicate  without  exception,  in  maze  L, 
the  period  in  which  the  nature  of  the  two  paths  had  been  dis- 
covered. The  extended  continuation  of  errors  resulted  from  the 
fact  that  the  rest  of  the  maze  still  offered  a  series  of  minor  prob- 
lems, in  the  shape  of  small  cul-de-sacs,  easy  to  escape  from  but 
difficult  to  avoid.  The  explanation  given  in  the  account  of  the 
objective  records  in  Experiment  III  applies  without  exception  to 
the  records  from  this  maze.  The  same  type  of  abrupt  decrease 
also  characterized  the  results  from  maze  M,  and  the  fact  that  the 
time  and  error  curve  based  on  it  is  slightly  more  irregular  finds 
sufficient  explanation  in  the  fact  that  the  maze  itself  was  more 
complex.  The  stage  in  which  the  subject  learned  to  avoid  the 
entire  right  part  of  the  maze  is  marked  by  the  fall  of  the  curves. 
The  open  area  in  this  maze  undoubtedly  saved  it  from  being 
more  difficult  than  maze  L,  the  most  difficult  one  we  designed. 


d 

t/i 

W 
H 

in-i-ioOintONONPOOM<nTl-H-00^000'tOOOtntorrj'^ir,-<4-Of*5 

lO 

m 

-t 

Ol 

in 

CO 
u 

00 

in 
-1- 

Ol 

"-t 

CO 

"co 

\0    "5  1^  'T)                                                    „                                „                                                                                                „ 

in 

V)    lO^n     !\1     M     ►H     w                                      W                                                                                                                                                             M 

u 

On 
Ix 

U 

K 

^ 

•— ^ 

W 
^ 

f^OO   lO  'O  ^N  CO   Ov  (N   «   01   O   O   O 
O   0\  l^  rO        O 

"ooo  o  O>o  rx<>ooi  «  -to^-to 

00   1^  lO  M         Tt  M 

(—1 

in 

M 

CO 

t 

"co 

>1 

oi 

0) 
"co 

> 

r^  lo  o  01  -t  O   "  O   1^,  "  0)   eg   O  lO  "  O  O  O  O 
■+  C^l   1-                                                                                              « 

"O  O  O  00  O  O  1^  01  r^  t^  o  01  o  1^  ts.  -t  «  -t  Tf 
^  „    „    „    0-1    ro  0)    01    01    CO  OO  -t  ro  -t  oo  01    01    01    M 

So   CO  01   M   01                                                                                  t^ 

s* 

'co 
CO 

'o\ 

u 

t-i 

-t 

in 

.-,^ 
S 

rOOO   O   O   0\  O    CN  t^vO   0N0inv0  1^0000lTt00"i-<O"0)C00'"l"'-000 
'^CO0)01'-'0»-<01'-<                                                                                  01                              CO 

"b   1^  ^+0   C>  'O  l>^  -i-  fO  0)   lO  (^  O  00   'OOO   !>.  O   I^  oi  O  VO    "    oi   0|   ■^-  o|    'rr  >-  00   Ix  o 
"roiO^OroOOrOrool^rJ-i/-i(>OrororooiOl0101010l'^01M0101   —    —   ir, 

V)  01    01    01    "    -<    OO  01    01    i-<    i-H                                                                                                                                                 CO 

Ix 
CO 

•5- 

C 
& 

CO 

00   IX  lO  0>  0\  00  ro  rxOO  VO   rt  r>0  O   -t  oj   c^.oo   OlO-OOOO^ 
COOO)-*             010)>-iM  foOO  -^o  0\  oo  "                                           — 

"in  01   -^01   Q   Ov  oo  Ix  rx  txOO  OOQOvC    -1-ini^-T  tx^C   O   O   -t  CO 

rf  in  01  ro  C  >n  fo  O  ^01  01  -■  -^  in  oi  «  -r  oi  o  o  in  m  m  -t  oi 
>0  \o  cc  in  —        -t  01  01  '-  rn  i-n  ^  in  I/".  CO  c^  ■-  '—  >-                      « 

01 
Ol 

s 
in 

-Q 
CO 

I-' 

00 
CO 

Ix 
"co 

1X1-0"^OC00   01010001010«0010»000010)000 

0)  om 

'o  O  ix  -r  ix  -t  O  o  O  O  -t  ^1  ix  oo  in  ix  in  O  ix  o  <n  o  ix  in  ix 
-toi   oo-T-rcO-^rooo-q-oocoO*   OOOOOI   oOTTr^oool   ^  t^  ^   0« 

V  O   CO 
IT)  01 

"ix 

CO 

u 

CO 

t 
CO 

3 

m 

m 
u 
O 

!-• 

w 

H 

00Orx00^Oi-H00i-'OiO"O'-i'-oiOOOO 

>H     1-1              1-. 

^xo  O  in  O  a\  O  in  O  ix  O  CO  -t  f.  CO  txvo  in  -r  o 
inin"Ocoo4cocooi-^oi"»-ioioicnoioioiin 

""O   O  1x00                                                >-i                                     CO 

"9. 

VO 

a 

OJ 
CO 

<2 
CO 

6 
01 

"ot 

0 

6 

1-"  01  CO  -i-  lOVO  1x00  0\  O  •-  01  CO  ^  liOVO  txOO  On  O  1-  01  CO  '+  m^O  h>  00  On  O  "  o) 
HH«HH«i-ii-,wMH-i»-,0|0JN0IWN0IOJM0icocOO0 

■ 

O 

H 

u 

bo 

ca 

u 

> 
< 

P   o 


6 

pi 

jjQ  O  't  -*M  Tf  w  «   O  o  o 
-     fO  t-x  r^  N  01  loo  in  ro  N 

"^fOCqOJlOOJl-HMl-CWI-l 

"o 

CO 

NC 
01 

pi 
in 

"cn  O  t>.  O  f^l  t^  O  C>  O  -*  O  —  O  On  'i-  ir.  Q  m  t^  ■->  i^l  O  •^  -l-OC  r^i   -f  O  t^  m  irj 

01 

in 

01 

oi 

"oi 

t-N  r^  O   O   O    O   O 

"in  o   "   ro  <^  0\  O 
ro  in  ro  "   ►H         « 

O 

oc 

">r, 

01 

oi 

01 

't       ) 
in 

CO 
"cO 

in 

LOOO  "^VO  \o  fC  o  o\  <^>o  o  ^  -^  '^  •*  l^CO  o  t^  o  o  o 
CO  CO  '1  m  m  (N   CO  rO'.C                                  "   «              OO 

"-I   ^  in  i-H   •-  1^00   N  00   0\QO   ^0000<0<MOfOJ^"tN. 

1-1  h-iinoi  IN  o  coi-imm-vi-roinin-^M  roroO  corooj 

01 

't 

ir, 

CO 

"ri 
ir. 

01 

>1    i 

ui 
pi 

CO  0\co  <n  in^  om-sf^Tj-^m"  fOfo  m\o  cofocooo  o  o  O 

in                                                                                        >-i                                                      M    rsj 

"^1  Q  r^i  in  in  lo  in  m  r^  p  m  i^x  Q  m  m  r^  oco  t^  •*  O  o\  r-i  o  <n 

i-'OO'*-<4-(N(NM"0J"-'"O"'-i(NM'-i«i-,O(M01CN" 

"K    M      -H                                                                                                                1-1                                                                                <M      ^ 

01 

1 

"co 

in 

in 

H 

t^  •+  in  t^  t^oo  in  in  -^  ^  in  roOO  OO  ■*0n'*'*0n'*-*-*0  O  c^^  ovo\o  o  cn  rororomo  O  O 
T^roi-ii-i                                        M(N                                        M                      i-i!Ni-i(N(MN 

t^  ro  t^  O  O  'no  "  -t-  m  01  o^  t^  <^i  <^i  "^  0\  O  (>.  r^  i^  in  o  >0  r-^  oi  i^  t^  in\o  J-^  :^  o.  fo  f^i  fo  i^i 
"^roininino  ininmrD-^  "  ^fi-i  ^  o  cq  po>-  oi  oj  r^  o  'ooi  mro-to  fo^f'^fomr^i-  — 

"KtNi-i            w                          (Nmi-.            1-1                 w—            (\)M(M                               <-no 

^1 

CO 

"o 

m 

"in 

u 

O 

C^ 

fOOO   O   -^t^OOO   0\0M3   (*5\0  vOOOONrOI^ONf\)OJCOO\iN(N040)OjroinO)ini^t^ 
t^iNi-i>-iOI<Ni-ii-i                      i-icv)i-i                                                                            1-,                     *j 

(LI    ~ 

ininO\"  c^l   -iCOOior-i  Tj-ro<oO  O  Oi^^Ot^'^O  coO  C?N^incv|  OOOiomint^fOqj  i- 
-frn-tr^-f       mio'+ino)  r^oDnmr^ri-K^  1-H  c^  r\|  <n  IT)  -rf  ^\  0)  oj  -rj-rnmio"  ^fm  -^/j  ^ 

""0)1-1      01                                                          1-1                                     HHO)!-.                                                                                                                                     HH^ 

in 

CO 

00 
ro 

CO 
O 

"in 

<■ 

1-^ 

H 

\onoooocooioono<ninooo 

CO  1-1   1-1   1-1   0)  VO               CO 

vO  CO  "  OO  in  O  CO  in  o)  0\  ro  t-^  m  in 
CI   ro-xTmcO-t-t'-i   -tOI   rO"   "   i-i 

>0  «         >-i   CM  VO         >-i   CO 

CM 

"oi 

CO 

^01 

o 

(75 

'u 

O 

d 

w  CM  CO  T}-  \r,\o  r^oo  0\  O  M  <N  CO  -t  invo  t^oo  0\  O  "I  CM  CO  •+  invo  r^oo  0\  O  «-•  cm  co  'i-  in\o  j^ 

M„«"HHi-i„i-,wH,cMCMCMCMCM(Mf5CMCM<NCOrococOCOfOCOCo 

O 

H 

be 

J2 

EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  75 

The  last  trial  for  several  subjects,  after  the  maze  had  been 
run  three  times  without  error,  shows  a  sudden  increase  in  time 
and  errors.  This  was  occasioned  by  the  fact  that  many  of  them 
chose  to  perfect  their  route  first,  and  then  explore  for  a  possible 
path,  in  compliance  with  the  criterion  established  for  learning. 
The  last  trials  in  such  cases  represent  the  time  and  exploration 
necessary  to  satisfy  the  subject  that  no  shorter  path  existed. 

E.    EXPERIMENT  IV 

The  reports  from  the  preceding  experiments  were  unambiguous 
to  the  effect  that  the  different  attitudes  attempted  towards  learn- 
ing did  not  involve  actual  differences  in  method.  The  assuming 
of  a  reasoning  point  of  view  carried  with  it  a  more  evident  play 
of  ideas,  but  these  ideas  as  manipulated  by  the  learner  did  not 
directly  solve  maze  problems.  The  results  suggested  the  possibil- 
ity that  the  conditions  of  the  learning  task  made  only  one  method 
possible,  or  at  the  most  permitted  deviations  from  this  method. 
The  evidence  on  this  point  was  not  conclusive,  however,  and  an 
experiment  was  designed  to  bring  out  the  variations  possible. 

I.     Apparatus  and  Method 

(a)  Three  similar  pencil  mazes  were  used  in  Experiment  IV, 
one  of  which  is  shown  in  the  diagram,  Figure  14.  The  paths, 
}i  inch  wide,  were  cut  through  brass  plates,  8  inches  by  10  inches 
in  size,  and  3/16  inch  thick.  The  mazes  could  thus  be  turned 
over  and  be  used  mirror  fashion.  The  exit  and  entrance  ends 
of  the  paths  did  not  lead  out  of  the  mazes,  but  terminated  blindly, 
like  cul-de-sacs.  To  mark  the  exit,  a  brass  wedge,  fitting  closely 
into  the  blind  end  of  the  path,  acted  as  an  inclined  plane,  and 
carried  the  pencil  out  of  the  maze,  so  that  the  subject  knew  im- 
mediately when  he  had  completed  the  trial.  The  wedge  could 
be  placed  at  the  end  of  any  blind  passage,  and  thus  the  exit  as 
well  as  the  entrance  of  the  maze  was  variable.  A  wood  base, 
covered  by  a  plate  of  glass  ^  inch  greater  in  length  and 
breadth  than  the  maze,  was  used  as  its  support.  Four  strips  of 
brass,  of  the  same  thickness  as  the  maze,  formed  the  border  of  the 
top  of  the  base.     They  enclosed  a  rectangle  slightly  larger  than 


76 


F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 


the  maze  itself,  and  thus  allowed  it  to  fit  tightly  upon  the 
glass,  upon  which  a  sheet  of  paper  could  be  placed  for  the  pur- 
pose of  preserving  a  graph.  In  addition  to  holding  the  glass,  the 
brass  border  kept  the  maze  firmly  in  place.  The  apparatus  w^as 
easily  clamped  to  the  table. 


u 


Eai'T 


Enfrance 


Figure  14.    Maze  I  b. 

(b)  Method:  The  subject  was  asked  to  learn  three  mazes,  in 
successive  trials,  each  maze  at  a  different  sitting.  He  was  in- 
structed to  take  toward  each  a  separate  and  characteristic  attitude, 
which  was  defined  and  explained  as  follows : 

(i)  His  "Natural"  attitude.  The  directions  were  identical 
with  those  given  in  Experiments  I  and  H. 

(2)  An  attitude  of  "Conscious  Trial  and  Error."  The  learner 
was  asked  to  make  the  affair  as  conscious  as  possible,  to  attend  to, 
discriminate,  and  remember  paths,  but  not  to  reason,  or  speculate, 
or  indulge  in  ideational  activity  not  directly  concerned  with  the 
motor  processes  to  be  employed. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  77 

(3)  An  attitude  and  working  method  of  "Surplus  Activity." 
He  was  instructed  to  move  as  rapidly  in  the  maze  as  he  was  able. 
He  was  to  make  no  special  conscious  effort,  save  that  necessarily 
involved  in  maintaining  the  speed  called  for.  Since  the  distrac- 
tion tests  mentioned  in  Experiment  I  had  convinced  us  that 
complete  distraction  of  the  attention  was  impossible,  the  subject 
was  not  asked  to  concentrate  upon  some  extraneous  topic — that  is, 
he  was  allowed  to  employ  as  much  consciousness  in  the  learning 
as  the  actual  speed  conditions  permitted. 

The  point  was  emphasized  that  a  premium  was  placed  upon  effi- 
cient learning  only  in  as  far  as  it  was  accomplished  in  terms  of 
the  directions  given.  Several  subjects  had  stated  in  Experiment 
III  that  the  rational  attitude  was  not  conducive  to  the  best  learn- 
ing,  and  it  was  made  plain  that  objective  results  were  to  be  sacri- 
ficed for  the  attitude  desired. 

In  designing  the  mazes,  it  was  attempted  to  equate  them  in  the 
matter  of  complexity.  In  order,  however,  to  eliminate  the  factor 
of  the  influence  of  the  individual  maze  pattern,  different  mazes 
were  offered  to  each  subject  for  each  of  the  three  methods.  The 
mirror  form  was  employed  in  two  cases,  but  it  was  arranged 
that  no  one  subject  was  given  both  the  maze  and  its  mirror 
form  to  learn.  At  the  top  of  the  columns  in  the  tabulative  state- 
ment [page  98]  is  found  the  number  indicating  the  maze  used. 

The  subjects  in  this  experiment  were  J.  R.  A.,  J.  W.  H., 
M.  H.  S.  H.,  M.  R.  P.,  C.  N.,  W.  S.  H.,  and  R.  B.  O. 

2.  Results 

(a)  Reports  of  the  different  subjects  on  method:  The  sub-t 
jects  were  asked  at  the  close  of  the  experiment  to  write  a  detailed 
introspective  analysis,  based  on  a  comparison  of  different  methods 
used  in  all  the  mazes  they  had  learned,  in  this  and  in  the  preced- 
ing experiments.  The  essential  points  of  these  analyses,  ex- 
pressed as  far  as  possible  in  the  subjects'  own  terms,  are  as 
follows : 

(i)  Subject  M.  R.  F.  The  method  employed  in  the  "surplus 
activity"  learning  was  somewhat  different  from  that  used  with 
the  other  mazes.    This  was  the  result  of  the  unnatural  speed  re- 


78  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

quested  in  the  performance,  which  interfered  with  the  fixing  of 
associations,  partly  by  the  rapid  shifting  of  attention,  and  partly 
by  the  distracting  effects  of  the  disagreeable  affective  state,  and 
the  actual  strain  and  fatigue  involved.  Because  of  this,  seg- 
ments of  the  maze  were  learned  as  a  hand-motor  coordination, 
without  conscious  control. 

These  segments,  however,  were  those  in  which  little  opportun- 
ity for  error  was  present.  In  times  of  difficulty  such  a  method 
was  inadequate,  and  the  crucial  turns  were  figured  out  by  essen- 
tially the  same  method  used  in  all  the  other  mazes.  The  solution 
was  delayed,  however,  by  the  conditions  imposed. 

The  attitude  taken  in  the  other  mazes  presented  little  variation 
in  learning  method.  Where  reason  was  requested,  cues  were 
followed  up  a  little  more  consciously,  and  in  the  intervals  between 
trials,  the  problems  were  studied  a  little  more. 

On  the  whole,  there  was  sufficient  similarity  between  the  dif- 
ferent methods  to  warrant  their  being  considered  as  phases  of 
one  learning  activity,  but  the  "surplus"  method  represented  the 
most  pronounced  divergence  from  the  regular  procedure. 

(2)  Subject  J.  W.  H.  There  are  two  methods  possible  by 
which  a  maze  may  be  learned,  but  they  are  different  only  in  the 
relative  emphasis  placed  upon  common  factors.  The  first  was 
represented  in  the  "speed"  maze,  the  second  in  all  the  others. 
Both  involved  discrimination  and  memory,  but  in  the  second 
instance  this  is  more  deliberate,  more  overt.  It  involves  a  more 
conscious  attention  on  cues,  and  often  conscious  exploration  to 
find  these  cues.  More  emphasis  is  placed  upon  the  constructing 
and  following  out  of  a  vi^^ual  diagram.  In  the  "surplus  activity" 
maze,  little  emphasis  was  ^aid  on  the  visual  element — motor 
imagery  was  practically  the  only  type  used.  J.  W.  H.  was  able  to 
describe  the  true  paths  in  all  the  mazes  when  learned,  but  he 
knew  less  about  the  cul-de-sacs  in  the  maze  learned  by  rapid 
movements  than  in  the  other  mazes,  although  he  was  out  of  the 
true  path  a  relatively  longer  time.  This  he  ascribed  to  the  fact 
that  chance  success  through  surplus  activity  characterized  the 
learning  in  this  maze,  rather  than  chance  success  by  means  of 
deliberate  exploration. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  79 

(3)  Subject  M.  H.  S.  H.  This  subject  finds  only  one  method 
available  in  learning  mazes.  She  attempted  in  the  "speed" 
maze  to  learn  it  in  motor  terms — i.e.,  by  letting  each  successful 
trial  help  establish  a  habit.  She  assumed  that  the  true  path 
would  be  traversed  oftener  than  cul-de-sac  paths,  and  that  they 
would  as  a  consequence  be  finally  eliminated.  But  her  expe- 
rience proved  that  this  method  resulted  in  false  paths  becoming 
incorporated  into  the  true,  hence  conscious  avoidance  of  cul-de- 
sac  entrances  was  essential  for  every  maze  she  learned.  The 
learning  by  surplus  activity  approximated  unconscious  learning 
more  than  the  other  tests,  but  the  methods  employed  were  essen- 
tially the  same  for  all  the  mazes. 

(4)  Subject  W.  S.  H.  also  reported  that  only  one  method 
was  possible  in  the  actual  process  of  learning  to  run  through  a 
maze  without  error.  The  process  is  one  of  discriminating  and 
remembering  crucial  points.  Normally,  every  turn  and  path  is 
attended  to  at  the  start,  whether  it  presents  chance  for  error  or 
not,  and  those  found  free  from  dangerous  situations  are  dropped 
out  from  consciousness.  In  the  "surplus  activity"  learning,  he 
attended  only  to  those  crucial  regions,  as  a  series  of  definite  prob- 
lems, when  they  forced  themselves  upon  his  attention.  There- 
fore there  was  more  surplus  ideational  activity  in  the  rational 
and  natural  methods — surplus  in  the  sense  that  all  of  it  was  not 
absolutely  essential  to  the  act  of  learning. 

(5)  Subject  C.  N.  This  subject  made  a  two-fold  distinction 
of  methods  on  the  basis  of  the  voluntary  attention  paid  to  cues 
and  suggested  ideas  when  she  made  the  learning  a  studied  one, 
as  over  against  the  type  of  process  represented  in  the  "surplus 
activity"  method,  in  which,  through  repetition  of  errors,  the 
decisive  terms  were  forced  upon  her  consciousness.  Her  analysis 
follows  rather  closely  the  description  given  by  J.  W.  H.  and 
W.  S.  H.,  since  it  places  rational  learning  as  one  extreme  method, 
as  opposed  to  learning  by  the  method  of  rapid  movement.  She 
drew  the  distinction,  however,  in  terms  of  the  volitional  effort 
attendant  upon  the  one,  as  contrasted  with  the  other  in  which  the 
control  ideas  were  forced  upon  her. 

(6)  Subject  R.  B.  O.     The  essential  distinction  that  this  sub- 


8o  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

ject's  introspection  gave  him  was  that  apparent  to  W.  S.  H. 
In  any  rational  method  of  solving  maze  problems,  the  attention 
at  first  concerns  itself  with  every  experience  and  every  suggested 
cue,  although  some  of  them  are  found  afterwards  to  be  non-essen- 
tial. In  the  non-rational  method,  these  experiences  are  not  at- 
tended to  until  either  a  chance  success  forces  some  of  them  upon 
the  consciousness  of  the  learner,  or  repeated  entrance  into  a 
cul-de-sac  does  the  same.  In  such  instances,  attention  to  them 
is  necessary  and  involuntary,  and  is  indispensable  for  learning. 

{b)  Summary  of  the  analysis:  the  nature  of  the  method: 
The  similarity  of  the  different  reports  leaves  no  doubt  that  to  the 
minds  of  the  subjects  the  learning  under  different  conditions 
presents  simply  phases  of  the  some  process.  One  aspect  involves 
more  than  the  other,  of  what  was  variously  defined  as  conscious- 
ness, volition,  effort. 

The  different  mazes  called  forth  these  distinct  attitudes  only 
partially.  In  the  original  pencil  maze,  and  in  the  "Mouse-trap," 
there  was  a  constant,  almost  periodic,  fluctuation  between  these 
two  extremes.  Sometimes  helpful  cues  were  obtained  with  one 
attitude,  sometime  with  the  other.  The  fluctuations  were  due  to 
fatigue,  or  to  a  shifting  opinion  as  to  the  values  of  the  two 
methods,  or  to  the  type  of  local  situation  in  which  the  subject 
found  himself.  The  testimony  was  unambiguous  to  the  effect 
that  in  crucial  points  the  idea  of  which  way  to  turn,  or  not  to  turn, 
was  necessary.  At  times  the  subjects  were  definitely  on  the  look- 
out for  such  ideas,  at  other  times  the  essential  controlling  infor- 
mation was  suggested  to  them  involuntarily. 

Of  the  two  extremes,  the  one  imposed  by  Experiment  III, 
the  other  by  the  "surplus"  method,  the  subjects  were  in  accord  in 
the  statement  that  they  were  both  artificial  and  futile.  Neither 
was  a  "natural"  method.  They  could  not  learn  a  maze  by  "rea- 
son," neither  could  they  by  a  technique  tending  to  eliminate  the 
type  of  consciousness  involved  in  the  process — voluntary  atten- 
tion, discrimination,  judgment,  suggested  working  ideas,  memory. 
The  "natural"  method,  and  the  method  of  "conscious  trial  and 
error"  were  found  to  be  identical,  and  the  latter  phrase  was 
accepted  as  a  just  characterization  of  the  processes  involved,  if  it 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  8i 

were  taken  to  include  something  more  than  a  mere  passive  reten- 
tion of  cues  discovered  accidentally. 

Numerous  writers  have  of  late  formulated  a  modification  of 
the  conventional  antithesis  between  "trial  and  error"  and  "idea- 
tional" learning-.  Ruger^  mentions  the  fact  that  the  hit-or-miss 
method  was  in  evidence  with  his  subjects  in  their  attempts  at  the 
solution  of  puzzles.  Colvin,  who  cites  Ruger's  results,  refers  to 
the  trial  and  error  method  with  human  learners,  but  emphasizes 
the  fact  that  the  learning  endeavors  made  by  human  beings  are 
not  aimless,  but  are  controlled  by  anticipation  of  probable  results : 
"When,  however,  we  have  reached  a  higher  stage  of  develop- 
ment, particularly  in  man,  we  may  assume,  as  we  have  already 
pointed  out,  that  trial  and  error  is  something  more  than  a  hit-or- 
miss  process  through  which  an  adjustment  is  finally  secured. 
The  trial  becomes  a  conscious  one,  and  is  self-directed."  ^ 

Correlating  the  results  of  this  with  the  previous  experiments, 
we  conclude  that,  in  general,  the  method  of  learning  was  condi- 
tioned by  the  nature  of  the  maze,  rather  than  by  the  attitude  of  the 
learner.  In  proportion  to  the  extent  that  the  maze  was  complex, 
a  greater  amount  of  conceptual  control  and  reasoning  were  called 
into  play.  In  any  simple  maze,  the  method  approximated  a  pro- 
cess of  mere  trial  and  error.  A  certain  amount  of  discriminating 
and  memorizing  was  necessary,  and  little  opportunity  was  given 
for  the  play  of  higher  processes.  The  learner  has  control  over 
the  method  to  this  extent:  whether  the  sum  total  of  these  activi- 
ties is  to  he  represented  in  one  trial,  or  is  to  he  distributed  ovef 
a  series  of  trials,  is  largely  a  matter  of  choice.  The  indications 
are  that  the  most  efiicient  distribution  is  a  matter  of  individual 
variation.  The  subject  tended  to  set  the  pace  in  the  first  trial 
that  was  to  characterize  his  ensuing  trials,  and  he  termed  this 
his  "natural"  method  of  learning.  The  speed  demanded  in  the 
surplus  activity  test  was  evidently  too  great.  The  subject  was 
not  given  time  for  making  or  fixing  associations.     No  experi- 

*  Ruger,   "The    Psychology   of   Efficiency,"   -A.rchives  of    Psychologj',   June, 
1910. 
"  Colvin,  "The  Learning  Process,"  1912,  p.  23. 


82  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

ment  was  attempted  to  determine  the  speed  below  which  effi- 
ciency would  suffer. 

In  difficult  mazes,  like  the  "Mouse-trap,"  simple  memory  and 
discrimination  did  not  suffice  to  give  the  variability  of  behavior 
necessary  in  order  to  discover  and  retain  the  location  of  the  exit, 
and  the  sequence  of  paths  leading  to  it.  Then,  more  general  and 
conceptual  ideas  were  employed :  their  function  was  to  reduce  to 
a  minimum  the  number  of  trials,  or  to  secure  effective  variability. 
Thus,  had  the  general  scheme  of  the  maze  just  mentioned  been 
given  to  the  subject  before  he  entered  it,  the  bad  records  for  the 
first  trial  would  undoubtedly  have  been  cut  down.  The  problem 
was  therefore  largely  one  of  ideational  learning,  and  the  expla- 
nation of  the  divergencies  in  the  objective  results  is  to  be  found 
partly  in  the-  fact  that  different  conceptions  were  formed,  of  vary- 
ing degrees  of  correctness,  and  that  all  sorts  of  predilections 
entered  into  the  process. 

F.     THE  LEARNING  CURVES 

In  plotting  the  curves,  the  percentage  method  of  the  elimina- 
tion of  surplus  values  was  adopted.  This  scheme  was  used  by 
Carr  and  Hicks^  in  their  paper.  It  seeks  to  measure  in  terms  of 
percentage  the  rate  at  which  excess  or  surplus  time  and  errors 
are  reduced  to  zero.  The  time  not  absolutely  essential  for  the 
traversing  of  the  maze  is  considered  as  surplus,  and  it  is  found 
by  subtracting  from  each  trial,  the  shortest  time  made  in  any 
trial.  As  might  be  assumed,  the  shortest  time  made  is  usually 
found  in  a  trial  without  errors;  this  is,  however,  not  necessarily 
the  last  trial.  Since  all  errors  are  surplus  no  similar  subtraction 
is  made.  After  the  surplus  time  has  been  computed  for  each 
trial,  the  time  and  error  records  for  the  first  trial  are  each  given 
the  value  of  lOO  per  cent,  and  with  this  as  a  basis,  the  percentage 
value  of  each  of  the  ensuing  trials  is  computed.  The  cnrvt  is 
then  plotted  upon  the  percentage  results. 

The  method  has  two  advantages,  (i)  It  brings  the  time 
and  error  records  down  to  the  same  base  line,  in  any  trial  in 

*  Cf.  Carr  and  Hicks.  Human  Reactions  in  a  Maze :  Jour,  of  Animal  Be- 
havior, Vol.  n,  pp.  98-125. 


Trial  No. 

Subject 

J.  R.  A. 

.  \V.  H 

M. 

H.   .S. 

H. 

M.  R.  F. 

C.  N. 

W.  S.  H. 

M.  R.  F. 

Maze 

Ila 

Ilia 

la 

lb 

111) 

Illb 

lib 

la 

nib 

la 

Ilia 

lib 

lib          lb 

Ilia 

la 

Ila 

lb 

Illb 

la 

lib 

Method 

\at. 

T.&E. 

Surp. 

Nat. 

T.&E. 

Surp 

Nat. 

T.&E 

Surp. 

Nat. 

T.&E. 

Surp 

Nat.      T.  &  E. 

Surp. 

Nat. 

T.&E 

Surp. 

Nat. 

T.&E. 

Surp. 

, 

I '-I?" 

5'-I2" 

I '-30" 

3'-45" 

2'-06" 

l'-l7" 

I '-24" 

-58" 

3'24" 

-22' 

-42" 

-22" 

i'-U"        2'-28" 

-18" 

-22" 

4'-oo" 

r-40" 

-55" 

I'-.'O 

-39" 

2 

2-27 

I  -00 

-20 

-45 

-i3 

I  -01 

3-38 

1  -04 

-09 

I  -50 

I  -08 

-35 

-.8        I  -32 

-42 

-15 

-16 

-13 

2-40 

-21 

-23 

3 

2-45 

-39 

-59 

-07 

-26 

-18 

2 -48 

-jK 

-36 

I  -40 

-20 

-29 

-27        I  -32 

-42 

-36 

-47 

-15 

-43 

2-27 

-24 

4 

-45 

-38 

-21 

-10 

-22 

-09 

2-55 

-31 

-35 

-29 

-16 

-14 

-28          -17 

-08 

-15 

-17 

-18 

-51 

-15 

-II 

5 

-33 

-15 

I  -03 

-07 

-20 

-09 

-45 

-20 

-51 

-17 

-15 

I  -01 

■20        1  -00 

-09 

-15 

-18 

-08 

-25 

-iS 

-23 

6 

-36 

-15 

-II 

-0() 

-42 

1-02 

-25 

-■4 

-18 

-20 

-39 

-28         I  -O/ 

-09 

->4 

I  -57 

-13 

-20 

-23 

-II 

-35 

-19 

-II 

-15 

-47 

-55 

-24 

-20 

-15 

I  -01 

■20           -3K 

-oS 

-24 

-15 

-06 

-23 

-24 

•07 

8 

-33 

-26 

-29 

-2() 

-25 

1-30 

1  -05 

-17 

-49 

-15 

-18          -38 

-07 

-22 

-If) 

-16 

-20 

-12 

-10 

9 

r  -00 

-^3 

-10 

-10 

-3^ 

-34 

-10 

-13 

-16 

-14 

-ift        I  -01 

-II 

-23 

-16 

-09 

-25 

-13 

-10 

-4" 

-20 

-orj 

4-14 

1  -04 

1  -04 

-o<j 

-r3 

-14 

-24 

-17           -20 

-12 

-13 

-I  I 

-08 

-20 

-14 

-0.J 

!I 

-14 

-14 

-19 

-16 

-48 

-45 

-13 

-12 

-12 

-16 

-12 

-10 

-u 

-09 

-16 

-10 

-09 

12 

-46 

-17 

-10 

-15 

-.10 

-3' 

-09 

-15 

-20 

-19 

-05 

-10 

-oS 

-14 

-I') 

-10 

-07 

13 

-21 

-18 

-15 

-20 

-21 

-28 

-47 

-13 

-I  I 

-24 

-05 

-09 

-09 

-09 

-13 

-13 

-07 

M 

-17 

-21 

-1(5 

-15 

-51 

-=,2 

-■5 

-13 

-14 

-20 

-06 

-09 

-og 

-13 

-10 

-08 

-18 

-20 

-13 

-07 

-'15 

-28 

-06 

-of) 

-19 

-06 

-09 

-13 

-10 

-10 

20 

-19 

-20 

-10 

-16 

-20 

-38 

-08 

2-01 

-06 

-08 

-05 

25 

-30 

1-03 

-ig 

-05 

-09 

-II 

-08 

30 

-13 

-08 

-05 

15 

-08 

-09 

35 

-20 

-17 

-12 

-06 

-08 

-10 

40 

-=0 

-18 

-10 

-06 

-09 

-06 

45 

-20 

-14 

-24 

-15 

-08 

-06 

50 

-16 

-09 

-50 

-08 

-16 

55 

-09 

-26 

-08 

60 

-13 

I  -01 

-I- 

65 

-20 

-15 

-09 

70 

(1 

rial  94  1 

-09 
-09 

(Tr 

al   126) 

-08 

(Trial  69) 

-08 

1        Total 

i6'  32" 

21'  14" 

24'  43" 

4'  50" 

3'  37" 

11'  45' 

ly'  49" 

12'  24" 

so'  33" 

6'  II' 

5'  52" 

11'  09' 

8'  25"      9'  10" 

9'  00' 

4'o8" 

9'  10" 

10'  38" 

8' 30' 

7'  46" 

4'  "" 

Average 

47.7" 

22.1" 

15.7" 

4S.3" 

43.4" 

21.5" 

.59.4" 

41.3" 

24.0" 

33-7" 

25.1" 

13.3" 

50.5"       41.4" 

9.1" 

19.0" 

38.5" 

11.2" 

34.0" 

24.5" 

11-9" 

Tahi.k  .^. — Time  record,  Exjieriment  IV,  showi 
1  which  it  does  not  fall  upon  a  trial  number  giv 


ults  for  the  first  fifte 
the  column.     Totals  : 


■n  trials,  and  for  every  fifth  succeeding  trial  up  to  No.  70.     The  number  of  the  last  trial  is  indicated  in  parentheses 
nd  averages  are  computed  from  the  complete  records. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  83 

which  all  surplus  values  are  eliminated.     In  this  way,  it  simpli- 
fies the  task  of  ascertaining  the  number  of  perfect  or  nearly 


Percent 

100 


.0  

Trials  I  5  10  IS  zo     23 

Figure  15.    Percentage  Curve  of  J.  W.  H.,  Normal  Maze. 

perfect  trials  represented  in  the  graph.  (2)  The  relation  be- 
tween the  time  and  error  curves,  i.e.,  the  varying  number  of 
errors  per  unit  of  time,  is  readily  estimated.  For  purposes  of  com- 
parison, two  curves  of  J.  W.  H.  are  reproduced,  one  based  on  the 
percentage  method,  and  the  other  upon  absolute  time  and  errors. 
(Figures  15  and  16.)  One  disadvantage  of  the  percentage  curve 
is  that  it  is  likely  to  be  misleading  when  the  graphs  of  two  or 
more  learners  are  compared.  The  records  of  J.  R.  A.  and 
AI.  R.  F.  (Figures  23  and  24)  would  seem  to  suggest  that  the 
latter  subject  learned  the  "Mouse-trap"  with  the  greater  ease. 
Her  time  and  error  results  for  the  first  trial  were  i  hour,  20',  56". 
and  175,  as  over  against  21',  37'',  and  46  errors  for  J.  R.  A. 
But  since  the  results  of  the  first  trial  are  given  the  same  value 
for  each  learner,  100  per  cent,  the  graphs  do  not  afford  a  ready 
basis  for  a  comparison  of  absolute  results  of  the  different 
subjects. 

The  curves  based  on  the  "Mouse-trap"  and  the  Normal  maze 
records  were  selected  for  reproduction  since  they  were  the  two 
mazes  learned  without  restrictions  being  imposed  upon  the  learner. 
The  tabular  results  of  the  other  two  experiments  however  readily 
suggest  what  would  be  the  general  nature  of  their  curves,  if 
they  were  actually  plotted.     Two  features  of  the  curves  are  es- 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  83 

which  all  surplus  values  are  eliminated.     In  this  way,  it  simpli- 
fies the  task  of  ascertaining  the  number  of  perfect  or  nearly 


Percent 

100 


Trials  /  5  10  is  zo     23 

Figure  15.    Percentage  Curve  of  J.  W.  H.,  Normal  Maze. 

perfect  trials  represented  in  the  graph.  (2)  The  relation  be- 
tween the  time  and  error  curves,  i.e.,  the  varying  number  of 
errors  per  unit  of  time,  is  readily  estimated.  For  purposes  of  com- 
parison, two  curves  of  J.  W.  H.  are  reproduced,  one  based  on  the 
percentage  method,  and  the  other  upon  absolute  time  and  errors. 
(Figures  15  and  16.)  One  disadvantage  of  the  percentage  curve 
is  that  it  is  likely  to  be  misleading  when  the  graphs  of  two  or 
more  learners  are  compared.  The  records  of  J.  R.  A.  and 
M.  R.  F.  (Figures  23  and  24)  would  seem  to  suggest  that  the 
latter  subject  learned  the  "Mouse-trap"  with  the  greater  ease. 
Her  time  and  error  results  for  the  first  trial  were  i  hour,  20',  56''. 
and  175,  as  over  against  21',  37'',  and  46  errors  for  J.  R.  A. 
But  since  the  results  of  the  first  trial  are  given  the  same  value 
for  each  learner,  100  per  cent,  the  graphs  do  not  afford  a  ready 
basis  for  a  comparison  of  absolute  results  of  the  different 
subjects. 

The  curves  based  on  the  "Mouse-trap"  and  the  Normal  maze 
records  were  selected  for  reproduction  since  they  were  the  two 
mazes  learned  without  restrictions  being  imposed  upon  the  learner. 
The  tabular  results  of  the  other  two  experiments  however  readily 
suggest  what  would  be  the  general  nature  of  their  curves,  if 
they  were  actually  plotted.     Two  features  of  the  curves  are  es- 


Time 


>M"t 


Z'30 


z'oo" 


rso' 


I'OO" 


Errors 

30    30" 


0. 

Trials  / 


Time 
Errors 


zo     zi 


Figure  i6.  Curve  of  J.  W.  H.,  based  upon  absolute  time  and  error  records, 
Normal  Maze.  A  comparison  of  this  curve  with  Figure  i6  will  show  the 
points  of  similarity  and  difference  in  the  curves. 


Vercent 
100 


Triah 


Percentage  Curve, 


2J  30  3S  hi 

H.  S.  H.     Normal   Maze. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION 


8S 


pecially  prominent:  (i)  the  rapid  initial  descent;  (2)  the  pres- 
ence of  a  marked  series  of  ''steeples."  The  first  especially 
characterizes  the  "Mouse-trap"  curves;  the  steeples  are  more  in 
evidence  in  the  curves  from  the  Normal  maze. 

(i)  The  conclusion  has  been  urged  in  a  preceding  section  of 
the  paper  that,  in  as  far  as  there  is  variation  in  the  learning 
method,  the  variation  is  conditioned  largely  by  the  pattern  of  the 
maze  itself.  The  results  indicate  that,  on  the  objective  side,  there 
is  a  corresponding  difference  in  curve  characteristics. 


Percp/rf/ 


Time  _ 


Trials  / 

Figure  18.    Percentage  Curve,  G. 


-— /^ >- 

IS  ZO  Zif. 

M.  F.     Normal  Maze. 


i^z 


IS 
Normal  Maze. 


S  10  /f  20 

Figure  19.     Percentage  Curve,  M.  R.  F. 

A  maze,  irrespective  of  the  variable  factor  of  difficulty,  may 
be  complex  in  two  radically  different  ways.  The  path  may  in- 
clude a  relatively  large  number  of  turns,  and  the  individual  cul- 


86  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

de-sacs  may  be  simple,  consisting  at  the  most  of  two  or  three 
segments — as,  for  instance,  the  "L"  form  of  cul-de-sac.  This 
maze  would  be  difficult  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  such  blind 
passages.  As  opposed  to  this  type,  the  true  path  of  a  maze  may 
be  simple,  and  the  number  of  cul-de-sacs  few,  but  if  they  happen 
to  be  in  themselves  complex,  the  situation  that  is  presented  to  the 
learner  is  essentially  different  from  that  offered  in  the  kind  of 
maze  just  described.  Of  the  mazes  employed  in  our  investigation, 
those  used  in  Experiment  IV,  and  sections  of  some  of  the  other 
mazes  fall  under  the  first  class;  while  the  "Mouse-trap,"  Maze 
M,  the  parallel  paths  in  L,  and  cul-de-sac  6-9  in  the  first  maze 
used,  represent  formations  of  the  second  class. 

Our  results  indicate  that  a  maze  curve  tends  to  show  the 
rapid  initial  fall  in  proportion  to  the  extent  that  the  maze 
involves  a  short  true  path  with  a  few  very  intricate  cul-de-sacs. 
The  true  path  itself  is  easily  remembered  when  once  learned; 
hence,  assuming,  as  is  actually  the  case,  that  it  is  learned  in  the 
first  trial,  only  a  few  trials  are  required  in  order  to  perfect  it. 
Obviously,  other  things  being  equal,  the  general  slope  of  a  curve 
is  the  more  pronounced  as  the  number  of  trials  is  cut  down.  But 
a  complex  cul-de-sac  either  taxes  the  powers  of  discrimination  to 
the  utmost,  or  proves  to  be  entirely  too  formidable  for  them, 
and  the  practical  result  is  that  much  time  and  labor  is  expended  in 
order  to  learn  to  avoid  the  false  opening.  This  was  the  case  in 
the  instance  of  door  a  in  the  "Mouse-trap."  In  maze  L,  the  initial 
problem  assumed  a  slightly  different  aspect:  the  crucial  thing 
was  to  decide  whether  or  not  the  long  path  must  be  traversed. 

In  a  maze  consisting  of  a  series  of  simple  cul-de-sacs,  the 
learning  effort  tends  to  extend  over  a  prolonged  series  of  trials, 
each  of  which  results  in  a  slight  addition  to  the  detailed  knowl- 
edge of  the  route.  As  in  the  type  just  discussed,  the  emphasis 
is  upon  learning  to  avoid  false  openings;  but  there  are  many  of 
them,  and  only  a  few  can  be  mastered  in  a  single  trial.  The  sim- 
plicity of  each  is  a  guarantee  against  the  subject's  becoming  hope- 
lessly lost  in  the  path,  and  in  this  way  unduly  prolonging  the  trial. 
The  records  of  Experiment  IV  indicate  clearly  the  curve  be- 
longing to  this  type  of  maze. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION 


87 


It  should  be  remembered  that  our  resuUs  pointed  to  consider- 
able freedom  for  the  learner  in  the  matter  of  the  distribution 
of  his  time.  Hence,  it  is  quite  conceivable  that  one  could  de- 
liberately decide  to  learn  as  much  of  a  simple  maze  as  possible 


zso 


Trials  /  S  to  /S  zo  is  30   31 

Figure  20.     Percentage  Curve,  E.  C.  P.     Normal  Maze. 


Percent 
ito 


Time 

Errors 


0 
Trials  ; 

Figure  21. 


s  ID  IS  26  zs  n 

Percentage  Curve,  H.  F.  A.     Normal  Maze. 


in  the  first  trial,  by  prolonged  exploration.  Such  a  procedure 
would  tend  to  result  in  the  type  of  curve  that  we  have  just  asso- 
ciated with  the  more  complex  maze.  This  method  was  however 
not  followed  by  any  of  our  subjects,  in  the  simple  mazes,  so 
that  it  would  scarcely  seem  to  be  a  natural  way  of  learning. 


88  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

On  the  other  hand,  it  would  be  impossible  for  a  learner  to 
distribute  his  time  and  errors  in  such  a  maze  as  the  "Mouse-trap" 
in  any  other  way  than  that  shown  by  our  subjects,  assuming  that 
the  maze  presented  the  same  problem  to  him  as  to  them. 

A  prime  factor  that  we  conceive  to  be  responsible  for  the 
sudden  fall  of  the  curve  at  its  beginning  has  just  been  indicated. 
All  of  our  records  show,  however,  a  general  tendency  for  the 
curve  to  drop  after  the  first  trial  or  two,  irespective  of  the  scheme 
of  the  maze.  Hence,  another  factor  must  be  operative.  The 
explanation  of  this  tendency  is  to  be  found  in  the  introspective 
reports. 

The  reports  show  that  without  exception  the  net  result  from 
the  first  trial  was  a  knowledge  of  the  general  spacial  relations. 
The  relation  of  exit  to  entrance,  the  general  course  of  the  true 
path,  was  acquired  by  everybody  in  the  first  trial.  This  was  es- 
pecially obvious  in  the  Normal  maze,  but  was  sufficiently  in 
evidence  in  the  "Mouse-trap"  reports. 

The  subject  had  for  the  second  trial,  therefore,  a  skeletal 
scheme  of  direction.  Assuming  that  in  the  absence  of  detailed 
knowledge  of  the  maze,  he  was  as  likely  to  enter  cul-de-sac  6-9 
[page  4]  in  trial  II  as  in  I,  in  escaping  from  it,  however,  in 
the  second  trial,  this  general  idea  would  tend  to  inhibit  him 
from  turning  on  H.  In  the  first  trial,  he  had  no  reason  to  assume 
that  the  exit  was  to  the  left  of  this  region.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
several  subjects  testified  to  their  surprise  in  discovering  that  the 
maze  extended  as  far  to  the  left  as  it  did.  This  applies  to  every 
region  in  the  maze,  either  the  path  or  the  cul-de-sac. 

It  is  to  be  remembered  that  in  the  first  few  trials  the  learner 


Per  loo 
Cent 


^  10  If  ZO  ZF  Zi 

Figure  22.    Percentage  Curve,  J.  J.  T.    Normal  Maze. 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION 


89 


s    ll>----./ 

Trklsi      357 
Figure  23.     Percentage  Curve,  J.  R.  A.     The  "Mouse-trap." 

did  not  recognize  H  or  I  as  belonging  to  the  true  path,  as  distin- 
guished from  6.  The  ability  to  distinguish  which  of  a  series  of 
turns  had  led  him  into  a  blind  ending  was  acquired  only  after 
more  prolonged  study  of  a  region.  Even  a  simple  situation  like 
13-14,  when  the  subject  entered  it  for  the  first  time,  did  not  come 
to  him  as  a  cul-de-sac,  but  as  a  runway  making  a  right-angled 
turn.  The  subject,  instead,  found  himself,  after  a  series  of  turns, 
blocked  by  a  blind  ending.  Hence,  in  the  second  trial,  his  con- 
trol was  the  dominant  idea  of  taking  any  turn  which  led  to  the 
left. 

The  behavior  in  the  second  trial  was  motivated  by  this  general 
working  scheme,  as  was  also,  to  a  large  extent,  the  third.  Spe- 
cific problems  began  to  be  raised  in  this  trial,  to  be  acted  upon 
in  the  fourth.  Since  the  control  for  III  was  practically  the 
same  as  for  II,  but  more  specific  and  definite,  a  second  decrease 
in  time  and  error  was  to  be  expected ;  but  since  the  essential 
aspect  of  the  idea  had  functioned  for  the  second  trial,  a  less  pro- 
nounced decrease  would  obviously  result.  The  introspections  are 
in  complete  accord  with  these  suppositions. 


.  ,0 
Trials  I      3      s      7 

Figure  24.     Percentage  Curve,  M.  R.  F.     The  "Mouse-trap." 


90 


F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 


Percent 

137.1 


3        5        If        II       13      15 

Percentage  Curve,  W.  S.  H.    The  "Mouse-trap." 


0 

Tr/als  / 


Figure  25. 

(2)  All  of  the  pencil  maze  curves,  and  some  of  those  plotted 
from  the  park  maze  records,  disclose  an  irregularity  marking  the 
trials  III  or  IV,  and  a  series  of  fluctuations — the  "steeples". — 
extending  over  the  following  half  dozen  or  more  trials.  There 
are  a  number  of  reasons  which  account  for  these  irregularities. 
Some  of  these  may  be  conveniently  grouped  together,  as  constitut- 
ing a  general  causal  factor. 

The  general  reason  why,  in  the  stage  of  learning  represented 
by  the  third  or  fourth  trial,  and  extending  throughout  the  learn- 
ing, fluctuations  should  occur,  is  to  be  explained  by  the  fact  that 
at  this  stage  the  control  was  rather  definitely  changed  from  a 
general  spacial  idea  to  a  series  of  specific  control  ideas,  built  up 
by  various  factors,  each  tending  to  increase  temporarily  the 
time  and  error  records.  After  the  third  trial,  the  process  of  learn- 
ing the  maze  resolved  itself  into  a  series  of  individual  problems. 

Again,  the  reports  from  the  "Normal"  maze  indicate  the 
nature  of  these  problems.  The  learner  knew  by  this  time  that  a 
rather  complex  cul-de-sac  occupied  the  right  section  of  the  maze. 
He  was  interested,  therefore,  in  learning  definitely  how  to  avoid 
it,  either  by  fixing  in  mind  the  specific  turns  in  the  true  path,  or 
the  openings  in  the  path.  His  general  scheme  had  been  found 
inadequate  to  carry  him  through  this  vicinity  safely.  He  was 
interested,  not  in  working  through  this  region,  but  in  traversing 
it  without  error.  We  find  reports  of  the  subject's  being  "hope- 
lessly lost"  in  this  region  in  the  3-5  trials,  that  we  did  not  find 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  91 

in  the  initial  trials.  They  were  lost  because  their  problem  had 
changed,  not  because  their  general  orientation  was  less  known. 

Therefore,  at  this  stage,  in  ascending  path  6,  not  knowing  yet 
its  relation  to  the  rest  of  the  maze,  the  subject,  actuated  by  a 
special  motive,  might:  (i)  be  tempted  to  explore  the  region. 
This  being  the  case,  he  was  as  likely  to  turn  into  H  as  to  continue 
on  I.  A  number  of  errors  would  result  as  a  consequence.  In 
fact,  he  would  tend  to  take  H  rather  than  I,  since  his  object  was 
to  discover  the  relation  of  the  cul-de-sac  to  the  earlier  part  of 
the  true  path,  or  the  part  that  had  led  him  into  it.  (2)  The  learner 
might  be  interested  in  fixing  in  memory,  or  in  discriminating 
in  turn  the  various  paths  of  this  portion  of  the  maze.  Several  of 
the  subjects  spent  a  consderable  amount  of  time  in  going  back 
and  forth  between  the  end  of  7  and  9,  until  the  inverted  T  notion 
of  the  situation  was  established  in  mind.  (3)  In  the  case  of 
being  "hopelessly  lost"  in  this  region,  as  the  result,  sometimes 
of  exploration,  sometimes  of  merely  an  attempt  to  get  through, 
a  large  number  of  errors  were  often  scored.  The  subject  would 
resort  to  an  almost  pure  type  of  trial  and  error,  in  order  to  find 
the  true  path.  Even  in  this,  however,  he  was  guided  perhaps 
not  completely  consciously,  not  primarily  by  the  general  sense 
of  direction,  but  by  the  more  specific  feelings  of  familiarity  and 
knowledge  of  this  region  already  acquired.  He  was  more  inter- 
ested in  discovering  the  known  part  of  the  true  path  than  he 
was  in  finding  the  exit.  Hence,  more  errors  would  result  when 
he  was  lost  than  in  the  earlier  trials,  in  the  same  objective  situa- 
tion. Any  of  the  three  procedures  just  mentioned  would  tend  to 
raise  the  curve. 

The  introspection  brought  out  a  number  of  specific  but  more 
or  less  interrelated  explanations  of  irregularities  in  the  curves 
during  this  period  of  definite  maze  problems.  The  first  grouping 
includes  those  factors  intimately  involved  in  an  attempt  to  work 
out  a  situation  or  problem  consciously.  These  factors,  or  motives 
for  behavior,  were :  ( i )  conscious  exploration,  with  the  object 
of  studying  any  particular  segment  for  the  purpose  of  eliminating 
the  non-essential  parts  of  it.  (J.  J.  T.  VI,  VIII,  X,  XVII, 
G.  M.  F.,  VI,  and  all  other  subjects  at  times)  ;  (2)  retracing  for 


92 


F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 


Vircent 

1000 


trials  / 


3       5      7~"? 

Figure  26.     Percentage  Curve,  E.  W.  J.     The  "Mouse-trap." 


Percent 


Time 

V  Erron 


Triafey 


Figure  27. 


3       5        1      1      IT 

Percentage  Curve,  R.  B.  O. 


The  "Mouse-trap." 


the  purpose  of  fixing  in  memory  a  certain  segment;  (3)  misin- 
terpretation of  the  experiences,  incidental  to  the  study  of  a  region. 
This  did  not  always  increase  the  time  and  errors.    A  second  group 


EXPERIMENTAL  SECTION  93 

finds  its  general  explanation  in  the  fact  that  attention  and  interest, 
habit  and  emotional  conditions  were  in  part  variable  factors. 
Hence  we  had  reported,  (4),  distraction  of  attention,  (E.  C.  P. 
VII  and  others),  (5)  general  laxity  of  attention  (M.  H.  S.  H., 
VI,  XII,  J.  J.  T.,  VIII,  M.  R.  F.,  XXXI),  (6)  over-reliance  on 
automatisms,  (J.  W.  H.,  VIII,  XI,  XIV,  J.  J.  T.,  XVII).  A 
third  and  most  common  cause  of  errors  was  (7)  due  to  the 
tendency  to  resort  to  a  trial  and  error  procedure,  as  a  result  of 
fatigue,  discouragement,  accidentally  getting  lost,  and  various 
conditions.  It  is  not  implied  that  this  method  necessarily  was 
the  cause  of  more  errors  than  would  be  the  attempt  on  the  part 
of  the  subject  to  maintain  a  more  conscious  attitude. 

The  irregularities  occasioned  by  the  development  of  specific 
problems  were  necessarily  involved  by  them.  No  study  of  a  sit- 
uation could  be  possible  without  costing  an  expenditure  of  time, 
and  of  errors,  under  the  marking  system  employed  in  the  experi- 
ment. The  tax  on  memory  was  too  great  to  permit  certain 
regions  to  be  learned  without  frequent  retracing  through  them. 

Increases  due  to  the  other  factors  seemed  practically  as  unavoid- 
able. The  demand  upon  the  attention  and  memory  was  rather 
severe  during  the  learning  period,  and  assuming  even  the  possi- 
bility of  the  subject  maintaining  a  constant  amount  of  attention 
during  the  trials,  the  problem  of  its  distribution  was  a  vital  one. 
To  the  extent  to  which  the  subject  concerned  himself  with  the 
attempt  to  keep  in  memory  a  section  just  learned,  throughout 
the  remainder  of  any  trial  he  must  necessarily  be  somewhat  lax 
in  attending  to  the  situations  encountered. 

The  reasons  specified  account  for  irregularities;  they  hardly 
explain  the  fact  that  these  irreguliarities  graphically  should  take 
the  form  of  steeples.  Or,  in  terms  of  the  quantitative  results, 
while  they  account  for  a  sudden  increase  in  time  and  errors  at 
any  given  instant,  they  do  not  explain  why  this  was  invariably 
followed  by  a  corresponding  decrease  in  the  next  trial. 

The  fact  that  each  new  trial  meant  a  "fresh  start"  was  a  strong 
factor  tending  to  safeguard  the  subject  from  carrying  into  any 
trial  the  bad  effects  of  the  previous  one.  Accidents  in  a  trial 
due  to  laxity  of  attention,  or  reliance  upon  habit,  seemed  to  put 


94  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

the  subject  on  his  guard  for  the  next  trial.  The  emotional  effects 
were  as  a  rule  not  carried  from  one  trial  into  the  next.  At  the 
same  time,  however,  a  problem  generally  extended  over  a  series 
of  trials ;  and  to  the  extent  that  no  special  progress  was  made  in 
any  one  trial,  the  records  tended  to  be  similar  for  the  series. 
Hence  the  curves  show  the  combined  effects  of  the  two  factors. 

III.     SUMMARY  OF  RESULTS   AND   CONCLUSIONS 

A.     The  nature  of  the  learning  process 

1.  The  human  adult  in  learning  a  maze  employs  the  conscious 
processes  of  discrimination,  memory,  etc.,  in  order  to  build  up  an 
ideational  control.  Unconscious  learning  of  segments  which 
represent  any  degree  of  complexity  is  practically  impossible. 

2.  Two  chronological  stages  were  in  evidence  in  the  conscious 
part  of  the  learning.  The  subject  was  guided  in  the  first  few 
trials  by  a  general  scheme  of  direction,  gained  when  the  exit  was 
attained  for  the  first  time.  He  then  found  that  in  order  to  perfect 
his  route  a  number  of  separate  segments,  presenting  special  prob- 
lems, must  be  studied. 

3.  Difficulties  were  offered  mainly  in  the  form  of  memory  or  of 
analysis  and  interpretation.  A  maze  whose  cul-de-sacs  were  sim- 
ple primarily  taxed  the  memory;  one  in  which  the  formations 
were  intricate  called  for  more  active  analysis. 

4.  The  immediate  reaction  upon  the  maze  experience  is  per- 
ceptual in  its  nature,  and  simple  formations  are  immediately 
and  easily  analyzed.  A  complex  formation,  on  the  other  hand, 
calls  for  an  interpretation  of  the  difficult  segment.  It  is  in  the 
elaboration  of  this  interpretation  that  higher  mental  activities 
are  elicited. 

5.  The  rational  processes  reported  were  unsystematic  and  seem- 
ingly futile.  Adequate  interpretations  were  suggested  to  the 
learner  as  the  result  of  prolonged  exploration,  rather  than  rea- 
soned out.  Cues  which  logically  should  be  utilized  for  correct 
inferences  were  disregarded,  and  ideas  were  acted  upon  in  an 
uncritical  manner  until  they  were  proven  by  trial  to  be  incorrect. 
The  explanation  of  the  meagre  attempts  at  reasoning  is  to  be 
found  in  the  fact  that  the  learner  had  no  past  experience  to  apply 


SUMMARY  OF  RESULTS  AND  CONCLUSIONS  95 

to  the  situations,  and  in  the  fact  that  he  was  unable  to  select  his 
data — maze  paths  must  be  traversed  in  order. 

B.     Specific  functions  involved  in  the  learning 

(a)  Sensory  discrimination:  i.  Sensory  discrimination  in  the 
pencil  mazes  was  made  possible  by,  (a),  the  feeling  of  arm  posi- 
tion; (b),  the  length  and  direction  of  arm  movement,  in  any 
given  run-way;  (c),  the  sense  of  tactual  projection,  at  the  point 
of  the  pencil. 

2.  A  series  of  specific  tests  failed  to  warrant  any  assumption 
of  correlation  between  ability  to  learn  mazes  and  proficiency  in 
sense  discrimination. 

3.  A  number  of  supplementary  tests  proved  that  transference 
from  one  set  of  muscles  to  another  is  easily  accomplished.  That 
is,  the  left  arm  can  be  used  without  loss  of  efficiency  after  the 
right  arm  has  been  employed  in  the  learning;  and  wrist  and 
finger  movement  may  be  substituted   for  arm  movement. 

4.  While  the  physical  technique  called  for  in  the  "Mouse- 
trap" seemed  radically  different  from  that  demanded  in  the 
pencil  mazes,  the  learning  process  seemed  to  be  essentially  the 
same.  The  learning  was  perceptual  and  ideational,  rather  than 
sensory. 

(b)  Imagery:  i.  The  subjects  represented  a  rather  inclusive 
series  of  image  types  and  combinations.  Each  individual  em- 
ployed his  peculiar  image  equipment  for  all  mazes. 

2.  Objective  tests  purporting  to  check  up  reports  on  imagery 
were  in  the  main  unsuccessful;  they  did  however  serve  to  con- 
vince the  subject  of  the  accuracy  of  his  introspections  on  imagery. 

3.  We  were  unable  to  make  any  correlation  between  the  type  or 
combination  of  image  processes  used  with  efficiency  in  maze 
learning.  In  addition  to  the  absence  of  obvious  correlation,  the 
fact  that  different  subjects  used  the  same  form  of  imagery  in 
different  ways  made  comparison  impossible. 

4.  Some  reports  were  found  which  indicated  that  those  relying 
upon  kinaesthetic  image  processes  tended  to  rely  more  upon 
motor  habit  than  the  other  subjects. 

(c)  Attention  and  Habit:    i.  Attention,  in  learning  any  maze> 


96  F.  A.  C.  PERRIN 

was  distributed  in  a  three-fold  way:  it  was  concerned  with,  (a), 
the  actual  experience  while  traversing  any  section;  (b),  the 
"trail  behind";  (c),  an  anticipation  of  the  turns  to  come.  This, 
roughly  speaking,  represented  a  chronological  sequence  during 
the  learning  of  a  maze. 

2.  To  the  extent  that  the  subject  was  able  to  disregard  the  im- 
mediate experiences,  he  tended  to  rely  upon  habit  to  carry  him 
through  the  passages. 

3.  Habit  appeared  early  in  the  trials,  with  the  pencil  mazes,  in 
connection  with  the  segments  first  learned,  while  other  segments 
were  requiring  study.  Complete  automaticity  was  not  reported 
for  an  entire  trial  with  any  subject. 

(d)  Memory:  i.  Memorizing  was  recognized  as  the  chief 
difficulty  only  in  connection  with  the  simple  mazes ;  with  the  other 
mazes,  the  difficulty  was  one  of  analysis. 

2.  Experiments  designed  to  test  the  ability  to  memorize — i.e., 
with  intricate  maze  paths  lacking  cul-de-sacs — failed  to  establish 
correlation  of  ability  to  memorize  with  proficiency  in  learning 
actual  mazes. 

3.  In  addition  to  the  difficulty  of  retaining  knowledge  just  ac- 
quired, while  actually  traversing  a  maze,  some  of  the  subjects 
complained  that  the  intervals  between  trials — in  Experiment  I — 
were  too  long.  The  reports  indicated  that  an  equal  distribution 
of  interval  time  is  not  necessarily  the  most  efficient  distribution. 

(e)  Illusions:  i.  In  practically  all  the  mazes,  relative  lengths 
of  passages,  and  the  size  of  angles,  were  wrongly  estimated. 
Not  only  were  the  proportions  distorted,  but  the  size  of  the  maze 
as  a  whole  was  generally  over-estimated.  This  was  especially 
in  evidence  with  the  "Mouse-trap." 

2.  Illusions  were  not  as  a  rule  productive  of  bad  results,  inas- 
much as  they  did  not  disturb  the  notion  of  the  turn  sequences. 
In  one  or  two  cases,  however,  a  dififerent  estimation  of  the  length 
of  a  passage  from  the  one  usually  made  suggested  to  the  learner 
that  he  was  astray,  and  errors  resulted. 

C.  The  learning  method 
I.  A  certain  amount  of  active  memorizing  was  necessary  in 


SUMMARY  OF  RESULTS  AND  CONCLUSIONS  97 

order  to  learn  the  simplest  mazes,  and  a  genuine  study  of  maze 
situations  was  called  for  in  the  complex  mazes. 

2.  The  nature  of  the  mental  effort  depended  upon  the  complex- 
ity of  the  maze,  not  upon  the  volition  of  the  learner.  The  learner 
was  able  to  vary  the  temporal  distribution  of  his  effort  to  some 
extent. 

3.  Pure  "trial  and  error"  and  "pure"  reasoning,  or  even  "idea- 
tional learning,"  are  equally  inadequate  terms  to  characterize  the 
leaning  method. 

D.     The  learning  curves 

1.  The  obvious  features  of  the  curves  were,  (a),  the  rapid 
initial  descent;  (b),  the  steeples. 

2.  Two  factors  enter  into  the  explanation  of  the  initial  descent : 
First,  a  maze  whose  cul-de-sacs  are  intricate  necessitates  an  elabo- 
rate expenditure  of  time  in  learning  to  avoid  entering  the  cul-de- 
sac  openings.  Secondly,  in  any  maze,  the  notion  of  the  relation 
of  exit  to  entrance,  and  the  general  idea  of  the  course  of  the  true 
path,  acquired  in  the  first  trial,  enable  the  subject  to  eliminate 
purely  random  "try-outs,"  and  thus  to  center  his  activities. 

3.  Steeples  are  associated  with  the  second  phase  of  the  learning, 
in  which  specific  problems  are  attacked — these  problems  call  for 
systematic  exploration,  etc.,  which  temporarily  prolongs  the  time. 
Steeples  are  also  due  to  carelessness,  over-reliance  upon  habit,  etc. 


CE/VTs 


^^^  ^G  lag 


s? 


ocr 


I 


Ll) 


--"---'o. 


Gaylord  Bros. 


Makers 


Syracuse,  N.  Y 
PAT.  JAN.  2t,  1908 


>.V;f" ■'■•■-.  -'^-.-K  ■"•■'•-1'  ■ 

.'...H.V-/    ■.•■J:'.);„. ;'-•■;•■.;.•    , 

I'v  -v. ■-■»'. '^''i.;;    .■/.':.:.■  \. 
'V* ''.1  ./Jv  '.:',^.';  v  .■■.  ■ 


CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


